Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule for Pygmy Three-Toed Sloth, 20928-20939 [2024-05724]
Download as PDF
20928
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Taxonomy
Species identification of pyramid
pigtoe and round pigtoe, as well as
between other related taxa, is
challenging due to morphological
similarity and phenotypic plasticity. It
is further exacerbated by the fact that
many species are sympatric
(overlapping in geographical
distribution) (Olivera-Hyde et al. 2023,
pp. 2–5). Recent genetic studies led
researchers to suggest that the pyramid
pigtoe and the round pigtoe may be
conspecific (Inoue et al. 2018, p. 694;
Olivera-Hyde et al. 2023, pp. 8–14),
although species experts continued to
support recognition of the pyramid
pigtoe as a valid taxon due to
morphological differences and a lack of
comprehensive rangewide genetic
information comparing the similar taxa
(Olivera-Hyde et al. 2023, p. 15;
Williams et al. 2017, p. 39). Because the
pyramid pigtoe and round pigtoe are
difficult to differentiate, there has been
frequent misidentification by experts
and lumping of the taxa together in the
academic literature (Olivera-Hyde et al.
2023, pp. 2–5).
Both the SSA report for the pyramid
pigtoe and the September 7, 2021,
proposed rule to list the pyramid pigtoe
as a threatened species (86 FR 49989)
acknowledge the difficulty in
identifying the pyramid pigtoe. After
reviewing the best scientific information
available at that time, we agreed with
mussel experts and found that the
pyramid pigtoe was a valid taxon
(Service 2021, pp. 12–13; see also 86 FR
49989, September 7, 2021). Since that
finding, however, a comprehensive,
rangewide genetic analysis has been
completed comparing pyramid pigtoe to
round pigtoe, and this information now
confirms that they are conspecific
(Johnson et al., 2024, pp. 16–17).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Review of New Genetic Information
Prior genetic analyses relied on
results taken from individuals from
portions of species’ ranges, resulting in
conclusions that were limited to only
those areas where individuals were
collected (Inoue et al. 2018, p. 698;
Olivera-Hyde et al. 2023, p. 3). The new
study uses data collected from
throughout the ranges of both pyramid
pigtoe and round pigtoe populations
(Johnson et al., 2024, entire). Genetic
data were successfully sampled from
200 individuals for mitochondrial DNA
(mtDNA) analysis, 106 individuals for
nuclear DNA (nDNA) analysis, and 176
individuals for genotype-by-sequencing
(GBS) analysis across 11 populations
and 22 waterbodies (Johnson et al.,
2024, p. 33). Mitochondrial DNA and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
nDNA were used in previous studies but
were found to be problematic for
supporting species delineations in
Pleurobema, due to potential
hybridization and backcrossing effects,
resulting in a reliance on hard-todistinguish morphological variation for
species delineations (Olivera-Hyde et al.
2023, p. 14). The most recent analysis
incorporated GBS methodologies to
address uncertainty in assessing
whether pyramid pigtoe is a valid taxon
(Johnson et al., 2024, p. 6.).
The results of the study support the
hypothesis that pyramid pigtoe and
round pigtoe are conspecific based on
mtDNA, nDNA, and GBS data (Johnson
et al., 2024, pp. 13–17). The results of
the GBS analysis cluster individuals
based on geographic location and not by
species identification based on
morphology (Johnson et al., 2024, p. 16).
This finding is also supported by the
results of the mtDNA and nDNA
analyses and is consistent with the
results of prior published findings
(Inoue et al. 2018, p. 694; Olivera-Hyde
et al. 2023, pp. 8–14). The results do not
support the current morphologicallybased species delineations.
Summary of Justification for
Withdrawal
New rangewide genetic information
has become available since the
publication of our September 7, 2021,
proposed rule (86 FR 49989) to list the
pyramid pigtoe as a threatened species
with an associated section 4(d) rule
under the Act. The new information is
based on mtDNA, nDNA, and GBS data,
and concludes that pyramid pigtoe and
round pigtoe are conspecific. These
results support the findings of previous
studies that were too narrow in scope to
make definitive conclusions of species
delineation. The resulting single species
(round pigtoe; P. sintoxia) is wideranging and common throughout its
current range. Because pyramid pigtoe
(P. rubrum) is no longer considered a
valid species, we withdraw the
September 7, 2021, proposed rule (86
FR 49989) to list pyramid pigtoe as a
threatened species with an associated
section 4(d) rule.
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in
this document is available on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov
and upon request from the Asheville
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this document
are the staff members of the Fish and
Wildlife Service’s Species Assessment
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Team and the Asheville Ecological
Services Field Office.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–06221 Filed 3–25–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2023–0151;
FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 234]
RIN 1018–BG53
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Threatened Species Status
With Section 4(d) Rule for Pygmy
Three-Toed Sloth
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the pygmy three-toed sloth
(Bradypus pygmaeus; hereafter ‘‘pygmy
sloth’’), an arboreal mammal species
from Panama, as a threatened species
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). This
determination also serves as our 12month finding on a petition to list the
pygmy sloth. After a review of the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we find that listing the
species is warranted. Accordingly, we
propose to list the pygmy sloth as a
threatened species with a rule issued
under section 4(d) of the Act (‘‘4(d)
rule’’). If we finalize this rule as
proposed, it will add this species to the
List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and extend the Act’s
protections to the species.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
May 28, 2024. Comments submitted
electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES,
below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
eastern time on the closing date. We
must receive requests for a public
hearing, in writing, at the address
shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT by May 10, 2024.
ADDRESSES:
Written comments: You may submit
comments by one of the following
methods:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–HQ–ES–2023–0151, which
is the docket number for this
rulemaking. Then, click on the Search
button. On the resulting page, in the
panel on the left side of the screen,
under the Document Type heading,
check the Proposed Rule box to locate
this document. You may submit a
comment by clicking on ‘‘Comment.’’
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
to: Public Comments Processing, Attn:
FWS–HQ–ES–2023–0151, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803.
We request that you send comments
only by the methods described above.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see
Information Requested, below, for more
information).
Availability of supporting materials:
Supporting materials, such as the
species status assessment report, are
available at https://www.regulations.gov
at Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2023–0151.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rachel London, Manager, Branch of
Delisting and Foreign Species,
Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, MS: ES, 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803; telephone 703–358–2171.
Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have
a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY,
TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. Please see
Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2023–0151 on
https://www.regulations.gov for a
document that summarizes this
proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Requested
We intend that any final action
resulting from this proposed rule will be
based on the best scientific and
commercial data available and be as
accurate and as effective as possible.
Therefore, we request comments or
information from other governmental
agencies, Native American Tribes, the
scientific community, industry, or any
other interested parties concerning this
proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
(1) The species’ biology, range, and
population trends, including:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
(a) Biological or ecological
requirements of the species, including
habitat requirements for feeding,
breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range,
including distribution patterns and the
locations of any additional populations
of this species;
(d) Historical and current population
levels, and current and projected trends;
and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation
measures for the species, its habitat, or
both.
(2) Threats and conservation actions
affecting the species, including:
(a) Factors that may be affecting the
continued existence of the species,
which may include habitat destruction,
modification, or curtailment;
overutilization; disease; predation; the
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms, or other natural or
manmade factors;
(b) Biological, commercial trade, or
other relevant data concerning any
threats (or lack thereof) to this species;
and
(c) Existing regulations or
conservation actions that may be
addressing threats to this species.
(3) Additional information concerning
the historical and current status of this
species.
(4) Information on regulations that
may be necessary and advisable to
provide for the conservation of the
pygmy sloth and that we can consider
in developing a 4(d) rule for the species.
In particular, we seek information
concerning the extent to which we
should include any of the section 9
prohibitions in the 4(d) rule or whether
we should consider any additional
exceptions from the prohibitions in the
4(d) rule.
Please include sufficient information
with your submission (such as scientific
journal articles or other publications) to
allow us to verify any scientific or
commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely
stating support for, or opposition to, the
action under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, do not provide
substantial information necessary to
support a determination. Section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C.
1533(b)(1)(A)) directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is an endangered or a threatened
species must be made solely on the
basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20929
ADDRESSES. We request that you send
comments only by the methods
described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the website. If your submission is
made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from
public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We will post all hardcopy submissions
on https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this proposed rule,
will be available for public inspection
on https://www.regulations.gov.
Our final determination may differ
from this proposal because we will
consider all comments we receive
during the comment period as well as
any information that may become
available after this proposal. Based on
the new information we receive (and, if
relevant, any comments on that new
information), we may conclude that the
species is endangered instead of
threatened, or we may conclude that the
species does not warrant listing as either
an endangered species or a threatened
species. In addition, we may change the
parameters of the prohibitions or the
exceptions to those prohibitions in the
4(d) rule if we conclude it is appropriate
considering comments and new
information received. For example, we
may expand the prohibitions to include
prohibiting additional activities if we
conclude that those additional activities
are not compatible with conservation of
the species. Conversely, we may
establish additional exceptions to the
prohibitions in the final rule if we
conclude that the activities would
facilitate or are compatible with the
conservation and recovery of the
species. In our final rule, we will clearly
explain our rationale and the basis for
our final decision, including why we
made changes, if any, that differ from
this proposal.
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for
a public hearing on this proposal, if
requested. Requests must be received by
the date specified in DATES. Such
requests must be sent to the address
shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. We will schedule a public
hearing on this proposal, if requested,
and announce the date, time, and place
of the hearing, as well as how to obtain
reasonable accommodations, in the
Federal Register at least 15 days before
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
20930
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
the hearing. We may hold the public
hearing in person or virtually via
webinar. We will announce any public
hearing on our website, in addition to
the Federal Register. The use of virtual
public hearings is consistent with our
regulations at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3).
Previous Federal Actions
On November 15, 2013, we received
a petition from the Animal Welfare
Institute to add the pygmy sloth to the
List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife. On June 9, 2014, we published
in the Federal Register (79 FR 32900) a
90-day finding that the petition
presented substantial scientific and
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted;
that document initiated a status review
for the pygmy sloth.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Peer Review
A species status assessment (SSA)
team prepared an SSA report for the
pygmy sloth. The SSA team was
composed of Service biologists, in
consultation with other species experts.
The SSA report represents a
compilation of the best scientific and
commercial data available concerning
the status of the species, including the
impacts of past, present, and future
factors (both negative and beneficial)
affecting the species.
In accordance with our joint policy on
peer review published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270),
and our August 22, 2016, memorandum
updating and clarifying the role of peer
review in listing actions under the Act,
we solicited independent scientific
review of the information contained in
the pygmy sloth SSA report. We sent the
SSA report to five independent peer
reviewers and received three responses.
Results of this structured peer review
process can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS–HQ–ES–2023–0151. In preparing
this proposed rule, we incorporated the
results of these reviews, as appropriate,
into the SSA report, which is the
foundation for this proposed rule.
Summary of Peer Reviewer Comments
As discussed above in Peer Review,
we received comments from three peer
reviewers on the draft SSA report. We
reviewed all comments we received
from the peer reviewers for substantive
issues and new information regarding
the information contained in the SSA
report. The peer reviewers generally
concurred with our methods and
conclusions, and provided additional
information, clarifications, and
suggestions, including clarifications on
terminology, additional literature on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
phylogeny and diet, information on
generation time, clarifications on
published correspondence, updates
regarding the ongoing conservation
efforts for the pygmy sloth, clarification
on the pygmy sloth’s inclusion in
Appendix II of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES) (27 U.S.T. 1087), and other
editorial suggestions. No substantive
changes to our analysis and conclusions
within the SSA report were deemed
necessary, and peer reviewer comments
are addressed in version 1.1 of the SSA
report (Service 2023, entire).
I. Proposed Listing Determination
Background
The pygmy sloth, the smallest of the
of four extant species of three-toed
sloths, is a tan-colored arboreal mammal
species with a near-white face and black
stripes over the eyes. Adults weigh
approximately 3 kilograms (kg) (6.6
pounds (lb)) and measure about 500
millimeters (mm) (1.6 feet (ft)) in length.
The species is most closely related to
the brown-throated three-toed sloth (B.
variegatus; hereafter ‘‘brown-throated
sloth’’; Ruiz-Garcia et al. 2020, pp. 468–
470; Anderson and Handley 2001, pp.
9–15). The pygmy sloth was originally
separated taxonomically from the more
widespread brown-throated sloth
(native to central America including
mainland Panama and northern South
America) based on its consistently
smaller size and distinct skeletal
structures (Anderson and Handley 2001,
pp. 9–18). Having only been described
as a full species in 2001, there is little
detail available on the species’ life
history and habitat requirements.
Pygmy sloths are found only on the
small Panamanian island Isla Escudo de
Veraguas (hereafter, ‘‘Escudo’’), which is
4.3 square kilometers (km2) (1.7 square
miles (mi2)) in area and lies about 18
kilometers (km) (11.2 miles (mi)) from
the Panamanian mainland (Anderson
and Handley 2001, p. 5). About 2.5
percent of the island is composed of red
mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) thickets
scattered along the north coast, and the
remainder of the island is a mixed
species tropical forest (Kaviar et al.
2012, pp. 1–3; Voirin 2015, p. 705;
Zoological Society of London (ZSL)
2017, p. 11). It is uncertain whether
sloths on Escudo are reliant on the
mangroves or whether some live
entirely within the interior forest
(Voirin 2015, p. 705). All three-toed
sloths are arboreal folivores; they
consume leaves with relatively low
nutritional quality, necessitating
physiological and behavioral
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
adaptations including limited
movements and low muscle mass
(Anderson and Handley 2001, p. 2).
Pygmy sloths have been observed using
at least 15 plant species (including
mangroves) for food and refuge, but it is
not known which, if any, plant species
they require (Smith et al. 2021,
unpaginated; Smith 2022, pers. comm.;
Superina 2022, pers. comm.).
Few data exist specific to pygmy sloth
reproduction and population biology.
Based on demographic data for threetoed sloths, it is reasonable to conclude
that an average generation time (or time
between birth of an individual and birth
of its offspring) is approximately 6 to 10
years for pygmy sloths (Anderson and
Handley 2002, p. 1051; Taube et al.
2001, p. 184; Superina 2022, pers.
comm.). Other three-toed sloth species
have only one offspring per pregnancy
after gestation of 100–180 days
(Benirschke 2008, p. 168; Taube 2001, p.
184). Longevity and survivorship are
little-known for three-toed sloths. Both
genetic data, although limited, and
documentation of sloth movement into
the interior forest suggest that there is
only a single population of the species
(ZSL 2017, p. 9; Voirin 2015, p. 705;
Silva 2013, p. 138).
A thorough review of the taxonomy,
life history, and ecology of the pygmy
sloth is presented in the SSA report
(version 1.1; Service 2023, pp. 1–8).
Regulatory and Analytical Framework
Regulatory Framework
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and the implementing regulations in
title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations set forth the procedures for
determining whether a species is an
endangered species or a threatened
species, issuing protective regulations
for threatened species, and designating
critical habitat for endangered and
threatened species. In 2019, jointly with
the National Marine Fisheries Service,
the Service issued a final rule that
revised the regulations in 50 CFR part
424 regarding how we add, remove, and
reclassify endangered and threatened
species and the criteria for designating
listed species’ critical habitat (84 FR
45020; August 27, 2019). On the same
day, we issued a final rule that revised
50 CFR 17.31 and 17.71 (84 FR 44753;
hereinafter, ‘‘the 2019 4(d) rule’’) and
ended the ‘‘blanket rule’’ option for
application of section 9 prohibitions to
species newly listed as threatened after
the effective date of those regulatory
revisions (September 26, 2019). Blanket
rules had extended the majority of the
protections (all of the prohibitions that
apply to endangered species under
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
section 9 and additional exceptions to
the prohibitions) to threatened species,
unless we issued an alternative rule
under section 4(d) of the Act for a
particular species (i.e., a species-specific
4(d) rule). The blanket rule protections
continued to apply to threatened species
that were listed prior to September 26,
2019, without an associated speciesspecific rule. Under the 2019 4(d) rule,
the only way to apply protections to a
species newly listed as threatened is for
us to issue a species-specific rule setting
out the protective regulations that are
appropriate for that species.
Our analysis for this decision applied
the regulations that are currently in
effect, which include the 2019 revisions.
However, we proposed further revisions
to these regulations on June 22, 2023 (88
FR 40742; 88 FR 40764). In case those
revisions are finalized before we make
a final status determination for this
species, we have also undertaken an
analysis of whether the decision would
be different if we were to apply those
proposed revisions. We concluded that
the decision would have been the same
if we had applied the proposed 2023
regulations. The analyses under both the
regulations currently in effect and the
regulations after incorporating the June
22, 2023, proposed revisions are
included in our decision file.
The Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
defines an ‘‘endangered species’’ as a
species that is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range, and a ‘‘threatened species’’ as
a species that is likely to become an
endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. The Act
requires that we determine whether any
species is an endangered species or a
threatened species because of any of the
following factors:
(A) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(B) Overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes;
(C) Disease or predation;
(D) The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; or
(E) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
These factors represent broad
categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an
effect on a species’ continued existence.
In evaluating these actions and
conditions, we look for those that may
have a negative effect on individuals of
the species, as well as other actions or
conditions that may ameliorate any
negative effects or may have positive
effects.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in
general to actions or conditions that are
known to or are reasonably likely to
negatively affect individuals of a
species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes
actions or conditions that have a direct
impact on individuals (direct impacts),
as well as those that affect individuals
through alteration of their habitat or
required resources (stressors). The term
‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either
together or separately—the source of the
action or condition or the action or
condition itself.
However, the mere identification of
any threat(s) does not necessarily mean
that the species meets the statutory
definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or
a ‘‘threatened species.’’ In determining
whether a species meets either
definition, we must evaluate all
identified threats by considering the
species’ expected response and the
effects of the threats—in light of those
actions and conditions that will
ameliorate the threats—on an
individual, population, and species
level. We evaluate each threat and its
expected effects on the species, then
analyze the cumulative effect of all of
the threats on the species as a whole.
We also consider the cumulative effect
of the threats in light of those actions
and conditions that will have positive
effects on the species, such as any
existing regulatory mechanisms or
conservation efforts. The Secretary
determines whether the species meets
the definition of an ‘‘endangered
species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ only
after conducting this cumulative
analysis and describing the expected
effect on the species now and in the
foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term
‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in
the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened
species.’’ Our implementing regulations
at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a
framework for evaluating the foreseeable
future on a case-by-case basis. The term
‘‘foreseeable future’’ extends only so far
into the future as we can reasonably
determine that both the future threats
and the species’ responses to those
threats are likely. In other words, the
foreseeable future is the period of time
in which we can make reliable
predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not mean
‘‘certain’’; it means sufficient to provide
a reasonable degree of confidence in the
prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable
if it is reasonable to depend on it when
making decisions.
It is not always possible or necessary
to define the foreseeable future as a
particular number of years. Analysis of
the foreseeable future uses the best
scientific and commercial data available
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20931
and should consider the timeframes
applicable to the relevant threats and to
the species’ likely responses to those
threats in view of its life-history
characteristics. Data that are typically
relevant to assessing the species’
biological response include speciesspecific factors such as lifespan,
reproductive rates or productivity,
certain behaviors, and other
demographic factors.
We considered the threats of habitat
loss and degradation and tourism and
development, along with demographic
factors of pygmy sloths, and determined
the foreseeable future to be
approximately 30 years. This timeline
for the foreseeable future is based on
several factors. The pygmy sloth
generation time is estimated to be
between 6 and 10 years, and similar
species only have one offspring per
pregnancy. Thus, the demographic
responses of the species to the identified
threats will materialize rapidly across
just a few (<5) generations. This
determination of foreseeable future
being 30 years assumes enough time
will pass for three to five generations of
cohorts to represent the population’s
resiliency to the identified threats.
Thirty years will also include time for
climate change and development to
progress, as well as for conservation
activities affecting Escudo to develop.
We are very confident in the predictions
from our climate models out to this time
step. Although there is uncertainty in
specific rates and strengths of the
impacts from development and tourism
over this time step, we are confident in
the negative effects these threats will
have on pygmy sloth. We have
information showing that nearby coastal
development plans are in place, roads
providing access to the coastlines are
being built, and conservation capacity
within the area is limited. This
information combined with
demographics of this species gives us
confidence that within a 30-year future,
these threats will negatively impact the
pygmy sloth. Therefore, based on the
best scientific and commercial data
available, we conclude that over a
period of 30 years we can make reliable
predictions that both the future threats
to the species and the species’ response
to those threats are likely.
Analytical Framework
The SSA report documents the results
of our comprehensive biological review
of the best scientific and commercial
data regarding the status of the species,
including an assessment of the potential
threats to the species. The SSA report
does not represent our decision on
whether the species should be proposed
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
20932
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
for listing as an endangered or
threatened species under the Act.
However, it does provide the scientific
basis that informs our regulatory
decisions, which involve the further
application of standards within the Act
and its implementing regulations and
policies.
To assess pygmy sloth viability, we
used the three conservation biology
principles of resiliency, redundancy,
and representation (Shaffer and Stein
2000, pp. 306–310). Briefly, resiliency is
the ability of the species to withstand
environmental and demographic
stochasticity (for example, wet or dry,
warm or cold years); redundancy is the
ability of the species to withstand
catastrophic events (for example,
droughts, large pollution events); and
representation is the ability of the
species to adapt to both near-term and
long-term changes in its physical and
biological environment (for example,
climate conditions, pathogens). In
general, species viability will increase
with increases in (or decrease with
decreases in) resiliency, redundancy,
and representation (Smith et al. 2018, p.
306). Using these principles, we
identified the species’ ecological
requirements for survival and
reproduction at the individual,
population, and species levels, and
described the beneficial and risk factors
influencing the species’ viability.
The SSA process can be categorized
into three sequential stages. During the
first stage, we evaluated the individual
species’ life-history needs. The next
stage involved an assessment of the
historical and current condition of the
species’ demographics and habitat
characteristics, including an
explanation of how the species arrived
at its current condition. The final stage
of the SSA involved making predictions
about the species’ responses to positive
and negative environmental and
anthropogenic influences. Throughout
all of these stages, we used the best
available information to characterize
viability as the ability of a species to
sustain populations in the wild over
time, which we then used to inform our
regulatory decision.
The following is a summary of the key
results and conclusions from the SSA
report; the full SSA report can be found
at Docket FWS–HQ–ES–2023–0151 on
https://www.regulations.gov.
Summary of Biological Status and
Threats
In this discussion, we review the
biological condition of the species and
its resources, and the threats that
influence the species’ current and future
condition, in order to assess the species’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
overall viability and the risks to that
viability.
Based on the species’ biology
described above and in the SSA report
(version 1.1; Service 2023, pp. 1–8), the
pygmy sloth requires food plants, intact
and connected forest habitats, and
sufficient conspecific individuals to
find a mate. Threats to the sloth’s
viability include the small extent (4.3
km2) of Escudo (as noted above, pygmy
sloths in the wild are found only on this
one small island in Panama), the
naturally limited size of the species’
single population, direct and indirect
impacts of tourism, habitat loss from
small-scale timber harvest, and habitat
loss from sea-level rise and erosion.
Together, these threats make the pygmy
sloth vulnerable to random declines due
to demographic stochasticity,
environmental catastrophes (e.g.,
storms), or both.
Threats
Small-scale but continuing harvest of
red mangroves and interior forest trees
occurs on Escudo for construction of
temporary huts used by fishermen and
for timber for tourism development in
nearby regions (Feller 2022, pers.
comm.; ZSL 2017, p. 16). Continued
forest loss would eventually lead to a
reduced pygmy sloth population, but
the lack of good information on pygmy
sloth movements and densities, and
their relative reliance on mangrove
versus interior forest, currently
prohibits determination of that
threshold. Evidence from urban
populations of related species indicates
three-toed sloth species may be
relatively resilient to life in small forest
fragments (Service 2023, p. 6; Pool et al.
2016, pp. 26–30), but it is not clear
whether this extends to the pygmy
sloth.
As the nearby coastal regions of the
Bocas del Toro, Veraguas, and NgobeBugle provinces grow in popularity with
local and especially foreign tourists, so
too has the volume of visits to Escudo
and the demand for infrastructure there
(ZSL 2017, pp. 3, 17). Both
Panamanians and foreign investors are
interested in developing the island and
nearby region for greater tourism
commercialization (Smith 2021, pers.
comm.; Voirin 2021, pers. comm; Voirin
2015, pp. 706–707). Although Panama
has a mandatory environmental-impactassessment process (Gonzalez 2008, pp.
320–327), reviews are sometimes
diminished by demand for development
(e.g., Gonzalez 2008, pp. 328–333) and
often initiated too late in a project’s
progression to revise plans or prevent
identified environmental harms (Jordan
2021, pers. comm.). Consultations
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
between government environmental
authorities and developers can be rapid
and leave little room for adjustment of
project plans (Jordan 2021, pers.
comm.).
Coastal development and construction
of major roads and ports on the nearby
mainland has improved and will
continue to improve accessibility,
making the trip to Escudo easier for
many more people (Smith 2021, pers.
comm.; Voirin 2021, pers. comm.;
Oberle and Rodriguez 2020, entire;
Bilbao 2017, unpaginated). While little
is known of the impacts of increased
human presence on the island to pygmy
sloth behavior and ecology, increased
tourism, particularly when combined
with inadequate regulatory mechanisms
and enforcement, is likely to lead to
direct and indirect impacts on sloth
viability through up-close encounters,
deforestation, habitat degradation,
increased litter and refuse, as well as the
potential to increase the introduction of
pests, invasive species, and disease.
Desire for up-close or in-hand photos
of pygmy sloths will likely increase
along with tourist visitation as global
popularity of sloths and demand for pet
and zoo-housed sloths has grown
tremendously (Voirin 2015, p. 706). The
risk of sloths being illegally taken and
smuggled away from Escudo into
domestic and international trade for
personal and commercial purposes is
greater as more unregulated visitors
reach the island (Jordan 2021, pers.
comm.; Voirin 2021, pers. comm.). This
is despite three-toed sloths rarely
surviving more than several months in
captivity and a general lack of
knowledge regarding husbandry
techniques for three-toed sloths (Voirin
et al. 2014a, p. 2; Espinoza and Cliffe
2013, p. 4; Raines 2005, p. 557).
While there is currently little legal
international trade of the species, there
are several examples of known trade or
attempts to trade specimens of pygmy
sloth. In 2013, 11 individuals were
taken from the wild with the intent to
export to the United States for
zoological purposes, but the attempted
export was stopped by protesters at the
Bocas del Toro Airport (Espinoza and
Cliffe 2013, p. 4). These individual
pygmy sloths were soon after returned
to Escudo, but at least two died after
reintroduction to the island (Superina
2022, pers. comm.). Additionally, eight
wild-sourced specimens of pygmy sloth
originating from Panama were legally
exported from the United States to
Portugal for scientific purposes in 2015.
In 2021, there was at least one trade
transaction of a specimen from China to
the Netherlands, but the involved
specimen was recorded as a CITES pre-
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Convention specimen, meaning the
specimen was acquired (removed from
the wild or born in a controlled
environment) before the date the species
was first included in the CITES
Appendices (July 1, 1975), and therefore
we presume it to be a non-living
specimen.
In general, Escudo and its
surroundings have very limited
government presence or regulatory
enforcement because of the remote
location and Escudo’s semi-autonomous
nature as an Indigenous-inhabited
territory that is administered by the
Bocas del Toro province. While smaller
scale, Indigenous-led pygmy sloth
tourism has been less disruptive than
the more industrial form (Voirin 2021,
pers. comm.), the permit requirements
for tourists to visit the island are not
enforced (ZSL 2017, pp. 17–18). Smallscale tourist operations are also likely to
be outcompeted by larger organizations
entering the market. Although largescale tourism has not yet reached
Escudo as it has in the surrounding
archipelago, tourism is steadily
increasing and tourist boats arrive
without notice and are reportedly
damaging coral reefs and sea turtle
nesting grounds (Smith 2021, pers.
comm.), indicative of at least some
operators’ lack of concern for or
knowledge about harm to the island’s
ecology.
Finally, as sea levels rise due to global
climate change, the extent of the pygmy
sloth’s island habitats may be reduced
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) 2019, pp. 6–13). Any loss
of habitat area on the already small
island could reduce the number of
sloths supported on Escudo.
Anecdotally, erosion has been
increasing on Escudo (Smith 2021, pers.
comm.), although its extent is not
quantified, and it is not known whether
this is due to sea-level rise, storms,
coastal deforestation, or other humancaused shoreline disturbance.
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory
Mechanisms
The Pygmy Sloth Conservation
Project, established in 2011 by ZSL’s
EDGE of Existence Program, is
employing innovative and integrative
activities to support pygmy sloth and
Escudo conservation (ZSL 2017, entire).
The project includes repeated
population surveys, education of
Indigenous communities and
schoolchildren regarding Escudo
ecology and the benefits of
conservation, and cooperation with the
Indigenous government and local
fishermen’s association to develop a
community-based natural-resources-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
management program (ZSL 2017, pp.
19–27).
In June 2022, a workshop was held in
collaboration with the Ministry of
Environment and the Nga¨be-Bugle´
indigenous authorities to develop a
management plan for the conservation
of the pygmy sloth (Smith 2022, pers.
comm.). The information generated by
this pygmy sloth conservation action
plan is expected to also serve as the
basis for a future comprehensive
management plan for Escudo, but as of
the publication of this proposed rule,
that plan has not yet been developed
(Smith 2022, pers. comm.).
As of 2017, the national Ministry of
the Environment could not afford to
visit Escudo independently (ZSL 2017,
p. 18). Consequently, there is no
evidence available to the Service of
enforcement of tourism permit
requirements or anti-littering and
deforestation laws. Escudo is designated
as a protected area with management
shared between the national Ministry of
the Environment and the local
Indigenous council (Voirin et al. 2014a,
p. 5), but in 2012, the island was
classified as open to tourism, as well as
scientific, entertainment, and cultural
development, so the benefits of the
protected-area designation are limited
(Voirin 2015, pp. 706–707).
Pygmy sloths are included in CITES
Appendix II, and international trade in
any specimen of the species requires
inter alia a valid CITES document that
authorizes trade in the specimen to
accompany the specimen. CITES export
permits may only be issued by the
exporting country’s CITES Management
Authority after a legal acquisition
finding is made by the exporting
country’s CITES Management Authority
and a non-detriment finding is made by
the exporting country’s CITES Scientific
Authority (for additional information
about CITES requirements, see 50 CFR
part 23). On May 5, 2023, CITES
Notification No. 2023/057 notified all
Parties to CITES that Panama has
suspended the issuance of all exports
for specimens harvested from the wild
for commercial purposes, including the
pygmy sloth, until scientific nondetriment findings are completed
(CITES 2023, unpaginated).
Current Condition
We assess the pygmy sloth’s
resiliency using two criteria: a
population-abundance criterion and a
forest-extent criterion. We incorporate
the knowledge that the species has
likely always been rare by basing the
population abundance criterion on
detection of a population decline in
addition to considering absolute
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20933
abundance, as rarer species are at
elevated risk of extinction even if the
rarity is natural (Flather and Sieg 2007,
entire; Johnson 1998, entire). The forestextent criterion subsumes the pygmy
sloth’s requirements for shelter,
connectivity, and native food plants.
Considering these two resiliency
criteria to account for the species’
demographic and habitat requirements,
we determined thresholds for high,
medium, and low resiliency for the
pygmy sloth. High resiliency would
indicate a high probability of population
viability with minimal to no declines in
population size. Moderate resiliency
would indicate the species has
experienced possible population
declines. Low resiliency would indicate
low probability of population viability
with certain population decline.
While it is difficult to estimate the
true size of the population due to the
challenge of detecting (and therefore
counting) pygmy sloths (Voirin 2015, p.
705), the most recent estimate of the
total pygmy sloth population size is
2,000–2,500 individuals, and the
population is estimated to be declining
(Smith et al. 2022, unpaginated). The
most recently available population trend
data from mangrove surveys in 2014–
2017 show no change in encounter rate
of sloths, although the uncertainty in
abundance is large (ZSL 2017, p. 13).
All estimates indicate an extremely
small number for an entire species
(Smith et al. 2022, unpaginated).
Based on our assessment of
deforestation from 2000–2020, only 0.11
percent of forested area in 2000 (totaling
3.95 km2) was deforested by 2020 (data
from Hansen et al. 2013, unpaginated;
Service 2023, pp. 14–16). This
assessment, however, is based on
satellite data (approximately 30 meters
(m) resolution) and does not detect
partial clearings. While ground-based
mapping of deforestation events shows
partial tree clearing has occurred on
Escudo (ZSL 2017, p. 16) and a recently
published assessment indicates habitat
degradation has resulted in a continuing
decline in the quality of pygmy sloth
habitat (Smith et al. 2022, unpaginated),
our assessment indicates the forest
extent on Escudo remains mostly intact.
We assess that the pygmy sloth
presently has moderate-to-high
resiliency, because the best available
data indicate that pygmy sloth
abundance and the extent of habitat
available on Escudo have not
considerably declined, but there
remains substantial uncertainty in these
estimates.
With no captive individuals and only
one wild population located on an
island less than 5 km2 in extent, the
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
20934
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
pygmy sloth naturally has very low
redundancy. Although very few large
cyclones and storms reach Escudo, it is
seismically active, and loss of the
Escudo population would equate to
global extinction.
With respect to representation, the
isolation of a small number of founder
individuals when the pygmy sloth
separated from the mainland population
of brown-throated sloths (likely around
9,000 years ago; Anderson and Handley
2001, p. 4) would have created a natural
genetic bottleneck (a sharp decrease in
a population’s genetic diversity as a
result of a reduction in population size;
Silva 2013, p. 138). Today, genetic
variation in the population is low (Silva
et al. 2018, p. 1301), and because the
pygmy sloth only inhabits Escudo, the
habitats it uses have little ecological
variation. For these reasons, we
consider the pygmy sloth’s ability to
adapt to changing environments, and
thus its representation, to be naturally
low.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Future Scenarios
Based on our assessment, we
concluded that two important potential
threats to pygmy sloth viability in the
future are: (1) increased development
and tourism around—and visitation to—
the island, together with the increased
likelihood of illegal taking and trade in
the species, and (2) increased habitat
loss and degradation caused by
deforestation and inundation of Escudo.
In the SSA report, we forecast the
species’ status under two alternative
future scenarios and six climate-change
projections (encompassing the
uncertainty in sea-level-rise trajectories)
to determine how deforestation, the
demand for sloths in the pet and
tourism market, and the potential for the
already small extent of Escudo to be
further reduced by rising sea level
would affect the species. Specifically,
our scenarios include ‘‘status quo’’ and
‘‘improved conservation capacity’’
alternatives to assess the potential
impacts of growing development and
tourism. For each of these two
scenarios, we assessed six climatechange projections to help encompass
the uncertainty in sea-level-rise
trajectories for the year 2050. This is
approximately 30 years from this
proposed listing and would include
time for climate change and
development to progress, as well as for
conservation activities affecting Escudo
to grow. Based on studies from other
three-toed sloth species, this 30-year
timeframe will include around three to
five generations of pygmy sloths
(Anderson and Handley 2002, p. 1051).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
Tourism and Development
A comprehensive understanding of
the current and future conditions of
tourism on Escudo is currently lacking
due to uncertainty in plans for
imminent coastal development and the
inherent difficulty of monitoring and
enforcing regulations because of the
remote nature of the island and lack of
funding for enforcement. Observational
accounts indicate that although large
tourism operations are not currently
reaching Escudo, the amount of tourism
arriving to the island is increasing, and,
if the planned development of the
nearby remote coastline occurs, tourism,
including from large outfitters, will
likely increase in volume (Jordan 2021,
pers. comm.; Smith 2021, pers. comm.;
Voirin 2021, pers. comm.).
International tourist visitation to
Panama grew by 150 percent between
2000 and 2008, and nature-based
tourism is an increasing portion of
Panama’s economy (Beaton and HadziVazkov 2017, pp. 23–29). Tourism grew
fast in the coastal and island regions of
Bocas Del Toro province (to which
Escudo belongs) from the 1990s
onwards, including growing
accessibility to vast stretches of beach
and rainforest. For instance, beginning
in 2004 and continuing into at least
2017, a major road was under
construction from Santa Fe to the
coastal city of Calovebora in northern
Veraguas province (Bilbao 2017,
unpaginated). The road’s route is a
major new access point to undeveloped
areas within easy boating distance of
Escudo (Bilbao 2017, unpaginated).
Additionally, developers have for
several years been amassing land
holdings in the regions near Escudo,
and they may be planning for the resale
of lots for future homes and hotels
(Jordan 2021, pers. comm).
As additional people move to and
visit the region, the very strong demand
for sloths taken from the wild for
tourists’ ‘‘sloth selfies’’ or for sale into
the pet trade (Greenfield 2020,
unpaginated) will likely impact pygmy
sloths (Voirin 2021, pers. comm.; Jordan
2021, pers. comm.). For example, other
sloth species are illegally collected from
the wild in Colombia for hands-on
tourism or illegal pet trade (Gorder
2021, unpaginated; Moreno and Plese
2006, p. 12).
The General Law on Environment of
the Republic of Panama (Article 23 of
Law No. 41 (1998)) requires that public
or private projects, including tourism
developments, be vetted through an
environmental-impact-assessment (EIA)
process administered by the national
Ministry of the Environment (Gonzalez
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2008, p. 324; Bethancourt 2000,
unpaginated). In practice, however,
developers often do not file for an EIA
or do so very late in the project’s
progress, which makes substantive
changes to the project challenging
(Jordan 2021, pers. comm.).
Consultations that do take place,
particularly in remote locations, are
frequently cursory (Jordan 2021, pers.
comm.).
By 2050 under the status quo
alternative, if the lack of environmental
law enforcement capacity in the remote
Escudo region (ZSL 2017, p. 18)
continues, the limitations of Panama’s
EIA process are not rectified, and the
unplanned nature of regional
development (Jordan 2021, pers. comm.)
persists, modest to large declines in the
species’ population are likely. These
declines are likely due to the stresses of
increased visitation to Escudo
(including up-close encounters), habitat
degradation, and illegal poaching to
meet the demand for the pet and zoo
trade domestically and internationally.
If, on the other hand, the ongoing
conservation efforts (see Conservation
Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms,
above) lead to improved conservation
capacity around Escudo, pygmy sloth
population declines would be less likely
to occur. A future with improved
conservation capacity would include
the regular presence of well-equipped
conservation officers from the national
Ministry of the Environment or
Indigenous governments or both, and
only sustainable, well-regulated tourist
visits to Escudo with no pygmy sloths
captured or disturbed. A completed
management plan would include
enforcement of specific limitations on
the volume and activities of tourists and
others to avoid pygmy sloth collection
and deforestation. While ongoing work
to support pygmy sloth conservation
(see Conservation Efforts and Regulatory
Mechanisms, above) indicates this is a
possible future scenario, given the
historical and ongoing challenges of
regulation and enforcement on Escudo,
this outcome is less likely than the
status quo scenario.
Loss of Habitat
Given its small island habitat, the
pygmy sloth’s viability is sensitive to
the potential for further reduction in the
available areas on Escudo, for example
losses due to sea-level rise and
deforestation. To assess the impacts of
sea-level rise, we used climate models
forecasting where land presently above
water will be lost due to sea-level rise.
We used these data to project the extent
of pygmy sloth habitat expected to be
lost under different climate-change
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
scenarios. Specifically, we included six
alternative climate trajectories defined
by the (1) degree of greenhouse-gas
emissions reduction achieved (three
representative concentration pathways
(RCPs), RCPs 2.6, 4.5, and 8.5) by 2050,
and (2) two different rates of Antarctic
ice-sheet melting, an uncertain but
potentially major contributor to global
sea-level rise (Kulp and Strauss 2018, p.
2; Kopp et al. 2017, entire; Kopp et al.
2014, entire).
The RCPs are Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios that
describe alternative future trajectories of
greenhouse gas emissions and that are
used to drive climate-model projections
in response to higher or lower future
emission rates (IPCC 2014, p. 8). In the
RCP names, the values 2.6, 4.5, and 8.5
refer to the rate at which energy is
trapped by Earth’s atmosphere in watts
per square meter (m2) at the height of
warming for the given scenario; thus,
RCP 8.5 is a scenario indicating faster
warming than RCP 4.5. RCP 8.5 is
considered a ‘‘high-emission business as
usual scenario,’’ i.e., towards the upper
end of what might occur without
climate-change mitigation policy (Riahi
et al. 2011, p. 54). RCP 4.5 is based on
a lower-emissions future in which
renewable energy, greater energy
efficiency, and carbon capture and
storage are more widely implemented
(Thomson et al. 2011, p. 77). RCP 2.6
represents stringent cuts to greenhouse
gas emissions sufficient to limit
warming to 2 degrees Celsius (°C) (van
Vuuren et al. 2011, entire).
The extent of Escudo habitat
inundated by 2050 ranged from 0.04
percent (RCP 2.6, no rapid West
Antarctic melting) to 0.08 percent (RCP
8.5, rapid West Antarctic melting;
Service 2023, p. 20). Even if we
assumed for the most pessimistic
scenario (0.08 percent of the entire
island inundated) that the entirety of the
inundated habitat was concentrated
within the 2.5 percent of the island that
is mangrove forests, only slightly more
than 3 percent of the mangroves would
be inundated. However, although
inundation is focused on coastal edges
of the island and includes some
locations on the north coast where
mangroves grow, part of the inundation
will occur outside the mangroves, so the
3 percent figure is likely an
overestimate. Moreover, red mangroves
can possibly keep pace with sea-level
rise by growing taller and accumulating
peat beneath their stilt roots (Mckee et
al. 2007, entire; Feller 2021, pers.
comm.). The interior forest habitat is
more extensive than mangroves (ZSL
2017, p. 11) and, when compared to
estimates for mangrove forests, less
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
interior forest habitat is projected to be
lost as a result of sea-level rise. Thus,
we project that loss of habitat due to
sea-level rise will be at most 3 percent
across mangrove and interior forest
habitats.
Deforestation presents a second
potential cause of habitat loss and
degradation. Forecasting future rates of
deforestation is difficult due to the
discrepancies between ground
observations and satellite data of
deforestation, as well as the unknown
impact that, if implemented,
development plans and potential
subsequent tourism increases might
have on deforestation. Under a status
quo future, deforestation may continue
as it occurs now, at low and consistent
levels, or it may increase, given the
interest expressed by some Indigenous
people in living on Escudo and the
expansion of tourism and associated
infrastructure development on the
island. With improved conservation
capacity, including increased
monitoring and enforcement of land use
of the island, we project that
deforestation levels would be low.
Overall Future Resiliency, Redundancy,
and Representation
Regardless of the climate-change
scenario, if the conservation capacity
around Escudo does not improve (i.e., if
it remains at the status quo), the total
resilience of the pygmy sloth is
projected to decline, likely falling into
the moderate-to-low-resiliency category,
and potentially falling into the lowresiliency category. If conservation
capacity is improved around Escudo, we
project that the pygmy sloth’s resiliency
could improve despite the species’
natural rarity. However, high
uncertainty exists in both current and
future resiliency due to the limited data
available on population abundance,
rates of deforestation, and effects of
tourism and development on the
species. Additionally, given the
historical and current lack of regulatory
and enforcement capacity, outcomes
under the improved-conservationcapacity scenario, although possible, are
less likely than those under the status
quo scenario.
Redundancy is not projected to
change under any of the future
scenarios; we expect there to remain
only the single Escudo population.
Representation may remain the same or
may decrease if tourists arriving at the
relatively accessible island edge and
beaches stress pygmy sloths into
retreating into the interior forest and
reduce the habitat types pygmy sloths
use, further limiting the species’
adaptive potential.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20935
We note that, by using the SSA
framework to guide our analysis of the
scientific information documented in
the SSA report, we have analyzed the
cumulative effects of identified threats
and conservation actions on the species.
To assess the current and future
condition of the species, we evaluate the
effects of all the relevant factors that
may be influencing the species,
including threats and conservation
efforts. Because the SSA framework
considers not just the presence of the
factors, but to what degree they
collectively influence risk to the entire
species, our assessment integrates the
cumulative effects of the factors and
replaces a standalone cumulative-effects
analysis.
Determination of Pygmy Sloth’s Status
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and its implementing regulations (50
CFR part 424) set forth the procedures
for determining whether a species meets
the definition of an endangered species
or a threatened species. The Act defines
an ‘‘endangered species’’ as a species in
danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, and a
‘‘threatened species’’ as a species likely
to become an endangered species within
the foreseeable future throughout all or
a significant portion of its range. The
Act requires that we determine whether
a species meets the definition of an
endangered species or a threatened
species because of any of the following
factors: (A) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D)
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
Status Throughout All of Its Range
After evaluating threats to the species
and assessing the cumulative effect of
the threats under the Act’s section
4(a)(1) factors, we determined that the
future viability of the pygmy sloth will
be reduced as ongoing and future
development on the mainland nearest
Escudo increases accessibility to the
island, likely reducing the pygmy
sloth’s resiliency, which along with its
naturally low redundancy and
representation will likely compromise
the security of the species’ continued
existence within the foreseeable future.
The pygmy sloth is a narrow endemic
species with a small population and
very limited range. Given the pygmy
sloth’s rarity and low genetic diversity,
the species has naturally low
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
20936
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
representation and redundancy. While
tourism and small-scale timber harvest
are ongoing in the species’ range, the
pygmy sloth is not currently at risk of
extinction because it maintains
moderate-to-high resiliency with a
variety of age classes and evidence of
reproduction, and while it is naturally
restricted to the very small island of
Escudo, its habitat requirements do not
currently appear to be limiting.
Although the species currently is not at
risk of extinction, threats to the species
are expected to increase in the
foreseeable future. Ongoing and
anticipated development on the nearby
mainland will facilitate increased access
to Escudo, increasing disturbance to
pygmy sloths through deforestation, upclose interactions, and illegal taking and
smuggling into domestic and
international trade for personal and
commercial purposes. While there are
regulatory mechanisms in place to
protect against these threats,
enforcement in the species’ relatively
remote range is limited and is likely
inadequate to reduce the impacts of
increased tourism and deforestation.
The current population of the pygmy
sloth is estimated to be declining, and
the likely increase of threats in the
foreseeable future will reduce the
species’ viability to a point that it is
likely to lack sufficient resiliency,
representation, and redundancy for its
continued existence to be secure.
Thus, after assessing the best available
information, we conclude that the
pygmy sloth is not currently in danger
of extinction but is likely to become in
danger of extinction within the
foreseeable future throughout all of its
range due to increased threats from
tourism and development that will
likely lead to habitat loss and
degradation (Factor A), overutilization
in a variety of forms from increasing
human interactions (Factor B), and the
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms (Factor D).
Status Throughout a Significant Portion
of Its Range
Under the Act and our implementing
regulations, a species may warrant
listing if it is in danger of extinction or
likely to become so within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. The
court in Center for Biological Diversity
v. Everson, 435 F. Supp. 3d 69 (D.D.C.
2020) (Everson), vacated the provision
of the Final Policy on Interpretation of
the Phrase ‘‘Significant Portion of Its
Range’’ in the Endangered Species Act’s
Definitions of ‘‘Endangered Species’’
and ‘‘Threatened Species’’ (hereafter
‘‘Final Policy’’; 79 FR 37578, July 1,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
2014) that provided if the Service
determines that a species is threatened
throughout all of its range, the Service
will not analyze whether the species is
endangered in a significant portion of its
range.
Therefore, we proceed to evaluating
whether the species is endangered in a
significant portion of its range—that is,
whether there is any portion of the
species’ range for which both (1) the
portion is significant; and (2) the species
is in danger of extinction in that
portion. Depending on the case, it might
be more efficient for us to address the
‘‘significance’’ question or the ‘‘status’’
question first. We can choose to address
either question first. Regardless of
which question we address first, if we
reach a negative answer with respect to
the first question that we address, we do
not need to evaluate the other question
for that portion of the species’ range.
Following the court’s holding in
Everson, we now consider whether there
are any significant portions of the
species’ range where the species is in
danger of extinction now (i.e.,
endangered). In undertaking this
analysis for pygmy sloth, we choose to
address the status question first—we
consider information pertaining to the
geographic distribution of both the
species and the threats that the species
faces to identify portions of the range
where the species may be endangered.
We evaluated the range of the pygmy
sloth to determine if the species is in
danger of extinction now in any portion
of its range. The pygmy sloth is a
narrow endemic that functions as a
single, contiguous population and
occurs entirely within a 4.3 km2 island.
Thus, there is no biologically
meaningful way to break this limited
range into portions, and the threats that
the species faces affect the species
throughout its entire range. As a result,
there are no portions of the species’
range where the species has a different
biological status from its rangewide
biological status. Therefore, we
conclude that there are no portions of
the species’ range that warrant further
consideration, and the species is not in
danger of extinction in any significant
portion of its range, and we determine
that the species is likely to become in
danger of extinction within the
foreseeable future throughout all of its
range. This does not conflict with the
courts’ holdings in Desert Survivors v.
U.S. Department of the Interior, 321 F.
Supp. 3d 1011, 1070–74 (N.D. Cal.
2018), and Center for Biological
Diversity v. Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d 946,
959 (D. Ariz. 2017), because, in reaching
this conclusion, we did not apply the
aspects of the Final Policy, including
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the definition of ‘‘significant’’ that those
court decisions held to be invalid.
Determination of Status
Our review of the best available
scientific and commercial information
indicates that the pygmy sloth meets the
Act’s definition of a threatened species.
Therefore, we propose to list the pygmy
sloth as a threatened species in
accordance with sections 3(20) and
4(a)(1) of the Act.
Available Conservation Measures
The purposes of the Act are to provide
a means whereby the ecosystems upon
which endangered species and
threatened species depend may be
conserved, to provide a program for the
conservation of such endangered
species and threatened species, and to
take such steps as may be appropriate to
achieve the purposes of the treaties and
conventions set forth in the Act. Under
the Act, a number of steps are available
to advance the conservation of species
listed as endangered or threatened
species. As explained further below,
these conservation measures include: (1)
recognition, (2) recovery actions, (3)
requirements for Federal protection, (4)
financial assistance for conservation
programs, and (5) prohibitions against
certain activities.
Recognition through listing results in
public awareness, as well as in
conservation by Federal, State, Tribal,
and local agencies, foreign governments,
private organizations, and individuals.
The Act encourages cooperation with
the States and other countries and calls
for recovery actions to be carried out for
listed species.
Section 7 of the Act is titled,
‘‘Interagency Cooperation,’’ and it
mandates all Federal action agencies to
use their existing authorities to further
the conservation purposes of the Act
and to ensure that their actions are not
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of listed species or adversely
modify critical habitat. Regulations
implementing section 7 are codified at
50 CFR part 402.
Section 7(a)(2) states that each Federal
action agency shall, in consultation with
the Secretary, ensure that any action
they authorize, fund, or carry out is not
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of a listed species or result in
the destruction or adverse modification
of designated critical habitat.
A Federal ‘‘action’’ that is subject to
the consultation provisions of section
7(a)(2) of the Act is defined in our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR
402.02 as all activities or programs of
any kind authorized, funded, or carried
out, in whole or in part, by Federal
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
agencies in the United States or upon
the high seas. With respect to pygmy
sloth, no known actions require
consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the
Act. Given the regulatory definition of
‘‘action,’’ which clarifies that it applies
to activities or programs ‘‘in the United
States or upon the high seas,’’ the
pygmy sloth is unlikely to be the subject
of section 7 consultations, because the
entire life cycle of the species occurs in
terrestrial areas outside of the United
States and the species is unlikely to be
affected by U.S. Federal actions.
Additionally, no critical habitat will be
designated for the species because,
under 50 CFR 424.12(g), we will not
designate critical habitat within foreign
countries or in other areas outside of the
jurisdiction of the United States.
Section 8(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C.
1537(a)) authorizes the provision of
limited financial assistance for the
development and management of
programs that the Secretary of the
Interior determines to be necessary or
useful for the conservation of
endangered or threatened species in
foreign countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c)
of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1537(b) and (c))
authorize the Secretary to encourage
conservation programs for foreign listed
species, and to provide assistance for
such programs, in the form of personnel
and the training of personnel.
It is our policy, as published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34272), to identify to the extent known
at the time a species is listed, specific
activities that will not be considered
likely to result in violation of section 9
of the Act. To the extent possible,
activities that will be considered likely
to result in violation will also be
identified in as specific a manner as
possible. The intent of this policy is to
increase public awareness of the effect
of a proposed listing on proposed and
ongoing activities within the range of
the species proposed for listing.
Although most of the prohibitions in
section 9 of the Act apply to endangered
species, sections 9(a)(1)(G) and
9(a)(2)(E) of the Act also prohibit the
violation of any regulation issued under
section 4(d) of the Act pertaining to any
threatened species of fish or wildlife, or
threatened species of plant,
respectively. Section 9(g) additionally
makes it illegal to attempt to commit, to
solicit another to commit, or to cause to
be committed any act prohibited under
Section 9, including violations of a 4(d)
rule. Section 4(d) of the Act grants the
Secretary broad discretion to prohibit
with respect to any threatened species
any act prohibited under Section 9(a)(1),
in the case of fish or wildlife, or section
9(a)(2), in the case of plants. Section
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
4(d) also directs the Secretary to
promulgate protective regulations that
are necessary and advisable for the
conservation of threatened species. As a
result, we interpret our policy to mean
that, when we list a species as a
threatened species, to the extent
possible, we identify activities that will
or will not be considered likely to result
in violation of the protective regulations
under section 4(d) for that species.
At this time, we are unable to identify
specific activities that would or would
not be considered likely to result in
violation of section 9 of the Act beyond
those included in the descriptions of
proposed prohibitions and exceptions
we would establish by protective
regulation under section 4(d) of the Act
(see II. Proposed Rule Issued Under
Section 4(d) of the Act, below).
We may issue permits to carry out
otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered and threatened
wildlife species under certain
circumstances. Regulations governing
permits for threatened species are
codified at 50 CFR 17.32, and general
Service permitting regulations are
codified at 50 CFR part 13. With regard
to threatened wildlife, a permit may be
issued for scientific purposes, to
enhance the propagation or survival of
the species, for incidental take in
connection with otherwise lawful
activities, for economic hardship, for
zoological exhibition, for educational
purposes, and for special purposes
consistent with the purposes of the Act.
The statute also contains certain
exemptions from the prohibitions,
which are found in sections 9 and 10 of
the Act.
The Service may also register persons
subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States through its captive-bred wildlife
(CBW) program if certain established
requirements are met under the CBW
regulations (see 50 CFR 17.21(g)).
Through a CBW registration, the Service
may allow a registrant to conduct
certain otherwise prohibited activities
under certain circumstances to enhance
the propagation or survival of the
affected species, including take; export
or re-import; delivery, receipt, carriage,
transport, or shipment in interstate or
foreign commerce in the course of a
commercial activity; or sale or offer for
sale in interstate or foreign commerce. A
CBW registration may authorize
interstate purchase and sale only
between entities that both hold a
registration for the taxon concerned.
The CBW program is available for
species having a natural geographic
distribution not including any part of
the United States and other species that
the Service Director has determined to
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20937
be eligible by regulation. The individual
specimens must have been born in
captivity in the United States.
Separate from its proposed listing as
a threatened species, as a CITES-listed
species, all international trade of pygmy
sloths by persons subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States must
also comply with CITES requirements
pursuant to section 9, paragraphs (c)
and (g), of the Act and to 50 CFR part
23. Applicable wildlife import/export
requirements established under section
9, paragraphs (d), (e), and (f), of the Act;
the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16
U.S.C. 3371 et seq.); and 50 CFR part 14
must also be met for pygmy sloth
imports and exports. Questions
regarding whether specific activities
with pygmy sloths would constitute a
violation of section 9 of the Act should
be directed to the Service’s Division of
Management Authority
(managementauthority@fws.gov; 703–
358–2104).
II. Proposed Rule Issued Under Section
4(d) of the Act
Background
Section 4(d) of the Act contains two
sentences. The first sentence states that
the Secretary shall issue such
regulations as she deems necessary and
advisable to provide for the
conservation of species listed as
threatened species. The U.S. Supreme
Court has noted that statutory language
similar to the language in section 4(d) of
the Act authorizing the Secretary to take
action that she ‘‘deems necessary and
advisable’’ affords a large degree of
deference to the agency (see Webster v.
Doe, 486 U.S. 592, 600 (1988)).
Conservation is defined in the Act to
mean the use of all methods and
procedures which are necessary to bring
any endangered species or threatened
species to the point at which the
measures provided pursuant to the Act
are no longer necessary. Additionally,
the second sentence of section 4(d) of
the Act states that the Secretary may by
regulation prohibit with respect to any
threatened species any act prohibited
under section 9(a)(1), in the case of fish
or wildlife, or section 9(a)(2), in the case
of plants. Thus, the combination of the
two sentences of section 4(d) provides
the Secretary with wide latitude of
discretion to select and promulgate
appropriate regulations tailored to the
specific conservation needs of the
threatened species. The second sentence
grants particularly broad discretion to
the Service when adopting one or more
of the prohibitions under section 9.
The courts have recognized the extent
of the Secretary’s discretion under this
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
20938
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
standard to develop rules that are
appropriate for the conservation of a
species. For example, courts have
upheld, as a valid exercise of agency
authority, rules developed under section
4(d) that included limited prohibitions
against takings (see Alsea Valley
Alliance v. Lautenbacher, 2007 WL
2344927 (D. Or. 2007); Washington
Environmental Council v. National
Marine Fisheries Service, 2002 WL
511479 (W.D. Wash. 2002)). Courts have
also upheld 4(d) rules that do not
address all of the threats a species faces
(see State of Louisiana v. Verity, 853
F.2d 322 (5th Cir. 1988)). As noted in
the legislative history when the Act was
initially enacted, ‘‘once an animal is on
the threatened list, the Secretary has an
almost infinite number of options
available to [her] with regard to the
permitted activities for those species.
[She] may, for example, permit taking,
but not importation of such species, or
[she] may choose to forbid both taking
and importation but allow the
transportation of such species’’ (H.R.
Rep. No. 412, 93rd Cong., 1st Sess.
1973).
The provisions of this proposed 4(d)
rule would promote conservation of the
pygmy sloth by ensuring that activities
undertaken with the species by any
person under the jurisdiction of the
United States are also supportive of the
conservation efforts undertaken for the
species in Panama, as well as under the
CITES Appendix-II listing. The
provisions of this proposed rule are one
of many tools that we would use to
promote the conservation of the pygmy
sloth. This proposed 4(d) rule would
apply only if and when we make final
the listing of the pygmy sloth as a
threatened species.
As discussed above under Summary
of Biological Status and Threats, we
have concluded that the pygmy sloth is
likely to become in danger of extinction
within the foreseeable future primarily
due to the impacts that nearby
development and subsequent increased
tourism will have on the species and its
habitat. Under the proposed 4(d) rule,
prohibitions and provisions that apply
to endangered wildlife under section
9(a)(1) of the Act would help minimize
threats that could cause further declines
in the species’ status.
Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Rule
Exercising the Secretary’s authority
under section 4(d) of the Act, we have
developed a proposed rule that is
designed to address the pygmy sloth’s
conservation needs. As discussed
previously in Summary of Biological
Status and Threats, we have concluded
that the pygmy sloth is likely to become
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
in danger of extinction within the
foreseeable future primarily due to the
impacts that nearby development and
subsequent increased tourism will have
on the species and its habitat. Section
4(d) requires the Secretary to issue such
regulations as she deems necessary and
advisable to provide for the
conservation of each threatened species
and authorizes the Secretary to include
among those protective regulations any
of the prohibitions that section 9(a)(1) of
the Act prescribes for endangered
species. We find that, if finalized, the
protections, prohibitions, and
exceptions in this proposed rule as a
whole satisfy the requirement in section
4(d) of the Act to issue regulations
deemed necessary and advisable to
provide for the conservation of the
pygmy sloth.
The protective regulations we are
proposing for the pygmy sloth
incorporate prohibitions from section
9(a)(1) to address the threats to the
species. The prohibitions of section
9(a)(1) of the Act, and implementing
regulations codified at 50 CFR 17.21,
make it illegal for any person subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States to
commit, to attempt to commit, to solicit
another to commit or to cause to be
committed any of the following acts
with regard to any endangered wildlife,
unless they are otherwise authorized or
permitted: (1) import into, or export
from, the United States; (2) take within
the United States, within the territorial
sea of the United States, or on the high
seas; (3) possess, sell, deliver, carry,
transport, or ship, by any means
whatsoever, any such wildlife that has
been taken illegally; (4) deliver, receive,
carry, transport, or ship in interstate or
foreign commerce, by any means
whatsoever and in the course of
commercial activity; or (5) sell or offer
for sale in interstate or foreign
commerce. Certain exceptions to these
prohibitions apply to employees or
agents of the Service, the National
Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal
land management agencies, and State
conservation agencies. Under the Act,
‘‘take’’ means to harass, harm, pursue,
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture,
or collect, or to attempt to engage in any
such conduct. Some of these provisions
have been further defined in regulations
at 50 CFR 17.3. Take can result
knowingly or otherwise, by direct and
indirect impacts, intentionally or
incidentally. This protective regulation
would provide for the conservation of
the pygmy sloth by including all of
these prohibitions because the pygmy
sloth is at risk of extinction within the
foreseeable future and putting these
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
prohibitions in place would help to
decrease synergistic, negative effects
from other ongoing or future threats.
As discussed above under Summary
of Biological Status and Threats,
deforestation, tourism and development
around Escudo, and collection for
tourism, pet, and zoo demand are
affecting the status of the pygmy sloth.
Prohibiting take (which applies to take
within the United States, within the
territorial sea of the United States, or
upon the high seas) would indirectly
contribute to conservation of the species
in its range country of Panama by
helping to prevent attempts to captivebreed the species to establish a domestic
market for trade of pygmy sloths.
Collection of the species for tourism,
zoo, and pet demand poses an ongoing
threat to the species due to its limited
range and small population size. Further
regulating import and export to, from,
and through the United States and
foreign commerce by persons subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States
could deter breeding and demand for
the species and help conserve the
species by eliminating the United States
as a potential market for illegally
collected and traded pygmy sloths.
Despite these prohibitions regarding
threatened species, we may under
certain circumstances issue permits to
carry out one or more otherwiseprohibited activities, including those
described above. The regulations that
govern permits for threatened wildlife
state that the Director may issue a
permit authorizing any activity
otherwise prohibited with regard to
threatened species. These include
permits issued for the following
purposes: for scientific purposes, to
enhance propagation or survival, for
economic hardship, for zoological
exhibition, for educational purposes, for
incidental taking, or for special
purposes consistent with the purposes
of the Act (50 CFR 17.32).
There are other standard exceptions to
the prohibitions included in the
proposed 4(d) rule for the pygmy sloth
(see Proposed Regulation Promulgation,
below), and the statute also contains
certain exemptions from the
prohibitions, which are found in
sections 9 and 10 of the Act. If the
species-specific 4(d) rule is finalized as
proposed, the import exemption for
threatened wildlife listed in Appendix II
of CITES (50 CFR 17.8; section 9(c)(2) of
the Act) would not apply to this species.
A threatened species import permit
under 50 CFR 17.32 would be required
for the importation of all specimens of
pygmy sloth. Further, as noted above,
we may also authorize certain activities
associated with conservation breeding
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
20939
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules
under CBW registrations. We recognize
that captive breeding of wildlife can
support conservation, for example by
producing animals that could be used
for reintroductions. We are not aware of
any captive-breeding programs of
pygmy sloths for this purpose. The
proposed 4(d) rule would apply to all
live pygmy sloths and dead pygmy sloth
parts and products and supports
conservation management efforts for
pygmy sloths in the wild in Panama.
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To
better help us revise the rule, your
Common name
comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell
us the numbers of the sections or
paragraphs that are unclearly written,
which sections or sentences are too
long, the sections where you feel lists or
tables would be useful, etc.
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that
environmental assessments and
environmental impact statements, as
defined under the authority of the
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) need not be
prepared in connection with listing a
species as an endangered or threatened
species under the Endangered Species
Act. We published a notice outlining
our reasons for this determination in the
Federal Register on October 25, 1983
(48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in
this rulemaking is available on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov
and upon request from the Branch of
Delisting and Foreign Species (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed
rule are the staff members of the Fish
Scientific name
and Wildlife Service’s Species
Assessment Team and the Branch of
Delisting and Foreign Species.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Plants, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation, Wildlife.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend
part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
PART 17—ENDANGERED AND
THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise
noted.
2. In § 17.11, in paragraph (h), amend
the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife by adding an entry for ‘‘Sloth,
pygmy three-toed’’ in alphabetical order
under MAMMALS to read as follows:
■
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
*
*
*
(h) * * *
Where listed
Status
*
*
Wherever found .......................
T
*
*
Listing citations and
applicable rules
MAMMALS
*
*
Sloth, pygmy three-toed ............
*
*
Bradypus pygmaeus ................
*
*
3. Amend § 17.40 by adding paragraph
(v) to read as follows:
■
§ 17.40
Special rules—mammals.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
*
*
*
*
*
(v) Pygmy three-toed sloth (Bradypus
pygmaeus).
(1) Prohibitions. The following
prohibitions that apply to endangered
wildlife also apply to the pygmy threetoed sloth. Except as provided under
paragraph (v)(2) of this section and
§§ 17.4 and 17.5, it is unlawful for any
person subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States to commit, to attempt to
commit, to solicit another to commit, or
cause to be committed, any of the
following acts in regard to this species:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Mar 25, 2024
Jkt 262001
*
*
(i) Import or export, as set forth at
§ 17.21(b) for endangered wildlife.
(ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(1)
for endangered wildlife.
(iii) Possession and other acts with
unlawfully taken specimens, as set forth
at § 17.21(d)(1) for endangered wildlife.
(iv) Interstate or foreign commerce in
the course of commercial activity, as set
forth at § 17.21(e) for endangered
wildlife.
(v) Sale or offer for sale, as set forth
at § 17.21(f) for endangered wildlife.
(2) Exceptions from prohibitions. In
regard to this species, you may:
(i) Conduct activities as authorized by
a permit under § 17.32.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
*
*
[Federal Register citation
when published as a final
rule]; 50 CFR 17.40(v).4d
*
*
(ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(2)
through (c)(4) for endangered wildlife.
(iii) Possess and engage in other acts
with unlawfully taken wildlife, as set
forth at § 17.21(d)(2) for endangered
wildlife.
(iv) Conduct activities as authorized
by a captive-bred wildlife registration
under § 17.21(g) for endangered
wildlife.
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–05724 Filed 3–25–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
E:\FR\FM\26MRP1.SGM
26MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 26, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20928-20939]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-05724]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0151; FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 234]
RIN 1018-BG53
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species
Status With Section 4(d) Rule for Pygmy Three-Toed Sloth
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the pygmy three-toed sloth (Bradypus pygmaeus; hereafter ``pygmy
sloth''), an arboreal mammal species from Panama, as a threatened
species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
This determination also serves as our 12-month finding on a petition to
list the pygmy sloth. After a review of the best available scientific
and commercial information, we find that listing the species is
warranted. Accordingly, we propose to list the pygmy sloth as a
threatened species with a rule issued under section 4(d) of the Act
(``4(d) rule''). If we finalize this rule as proposed, it will add this
species to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and extend
the Act's protections to the species.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before May
28, 2024. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59
p.m. eastern time on the closing date. We must receive requests for a
public hearing, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by May 10, 2024.
ADDRESSES:
Written comments: You may submit comments by one of the following
methods:
[[Page 20929]]
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0151,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, click on the
Search button. On the resulting page, in the panel on the left side of
the screen, under the Document Type heading, check the Proposed Rule
box to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on
``Comment.''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0151, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see Information Requested, below, for more information).
Availability of supporting materials: Supporting materials, such as
the species status assessment report, are available at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0151.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel London, Manager, Branch of
Delisting and Foreign Species, Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, MS: ES, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA
22041-3803; telephone 703-358-2171. Individuals in the United States
who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability
may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications
relay services. Individuals outside the United States should use the
relay services offered within their country to make international calls
to the point-of-contact in the United States. Please see Docket No.
FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0151 on https://www.regulations.gov for a document that
summarizes this proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Requested
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or information from other governmental agencies, Native
American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any other
interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
(1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
(a) Biological or ecological requirements of the species, including
habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns
and the locations of any additional populations of this species;
(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and
projected trends; and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its
habitat, or both.
(2) Threats and conservation actions affecting the species,
including:
(a) Factors that may be affecting the continued existence of the
species, which may include habitat destruction, modification, or
curtailment; overutilization; disease; predation; the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms, or other natural or manmade factors;
(b) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to this species; and
(c) Existing regulations or conservation actions that may be
addressing threats to this species.
(3) Additional information concerning the historical and current
status of this species.
(4) Information on regulations that may be necessary and advisable
to provide for the conservation of the pygmy sloth and that we can
consider in developing a 4(d) rule for the species. In particular, we
seek information concerning the extent to which we should include any
of the section 9 prohibitions in the 4(d) rule or whether we should
consider any additional exceptions from the prohibitions in the 4(d)
rule.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for, or
opposition to, the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, do not provide substantial
information necessary to support a determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of
the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(1)(A)) directs that determinations as to
whether any species is an endangered or a threatened species must be
made solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data
available.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov.
Our final determination may differ from this proposal because we
will consider all comments we receive during the comment period as well
as any information that may become available after this proposal. Based
on the new information we receive (and, if relevant, any comments on
that new information), we may conclude that the species is endangered
instead of threatened, or we may conclude that the species does not
warrant listing as either an endangered species or a threatened
species. In addition, we may change the parameters of the prohibitions
or the exceptions to those prohibitions in the 4(d) rule if we conclude
it is appropriate considering comments and new information received.
For example, we may expand the prohibitions to include prohibiting
additional activities if we conclude that those additional activities
are not compatible with conservation of the species. Conversely, we may
establish additional exceptions to the prohibitions in the final rule
if we conclude that the activities would facilitate or are compatible
with the conservation and recovery of the species. In our final rule,
we will clearly explain our rationale and the basis for our final
decision, including why we made changes, if any, that differ from this
proposal.
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for a public hearing on this
proposal, if requested. Requests must be received by the date specified
in DATES. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule a public hearing on this
proposal, if requested, and announce the date, time, and place of the
hearing, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in the
Federal Register at least 15 days before
[[Page 20930]]
the hearing. We may hold the public hearing in person or virtually via
webinar. We will announce any public hearing on our website, in
addition to the Federal Register. The use of virtual public hearings is
consistent with our regulations at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3).
Previous Federal Actions
On November 15, 2013, we received a petition from the Animal
Welfare Institute to add the pygmy sloth to the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife. On June 9, 2014, we published in the Federal
Register (79 FR 32900) a 90-day finding that the petition presented
substantial scientific and commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted; that document initiated a status
review for the pygmy sloth.
Peer Review
A species status assessment (SSA) team prepared an SSA report for
the pygmy sloth. The SSA team was composed of Service biologists, in
consultation with other species experts. The SSA report represents a
compilation of the best scientific and commercial data available
concerning the status of the species, including the impacts of past,
present, and future factors (both negative and beneficial) affecting
the species.
In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and our August 22,
2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review in
listing actions under the Act, we solicited independent scientific
review of the information contained in the pygmy sloth SSA report. We
sent the SSA report to five independent peer reviewers and received
three responses. Results of this structured peer review process can be
found at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0151.
In preparing this proposed rule, we incorporated the results of these
reviews, as appropriate, into the SSA report, which is the foundation
for this proposed rule.
Summary of Peer Reviewer Comments
As discussed above in Peer Review, we received comments from three
peer reviewers on the draft SSA report. We reviewed all comments we
received from the peer reviewers for substantive issues and new
information regarding the information contained in the SSA report. The
peer reviewers generally concurred with our methods and conclusions,
and provided additional information, clarifications, and suggestions,
including clarifications on terminology, additional literature on
phylogeny and diet, information on generation time, clarifications on
published correspondence, updates regarding the ongoing conservation
efforts for the pygmy sloth, clarification on the pygmy sloth's
inclusion in Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (27 U.S.T. 1087),
and other editorial suggestions. No substantive changes to our analysis
and conclusions within the SSA report were deemed necessary, and peer
reviewer comments are addressed in version 1.1 of the SSA report
(Service 2023, entire).
I. Proposed Listing Determination
Background
The pygmy sloth, the smallest of the of four extant species of
three-toed sloths, is a tan-colored arboreal mammal species with a
near-white face and black stripes over the eyes. Adults weigh
approximately 3 kilograms (kg) (6.6 pounds (lb)) and measure about 500
millimeters (mm) (1.6 feet (ft)) in length. The species is most closely
related to the brown-throated three-toed sloth (B. variegatus;
hereafter ``brown-throated sloth''; Ruiz-Garcia et al. 2020, pp. 468-
470; Anderson and Handley 2001, pp. 9-15). The pygmy sloth was
originally separated taxonomically from the more widespread brown-
throated sloth (native to central America including mainland Panama and
northern South America) based on its consistently smaller size and
distinct skeletal structures (Anderson and Handley 2001, pp. 9-18).
Having only been described as a full species in 2001, there is little
detail available on the species' life history and habitat requirements.
Pygmy sloths are found only on the small Panamanian island Isla
Escudo de Veraguas (hereafter, ``Escudo''), which is 4.3 square
kilometers (km\2\) (1.7 square miles (mi\2\)) in area and lies about 18
kilometers (km) (11.2 miles (mi)) from the Panamanian mainland
(Anderson and Handley 2001, p. 5). About 2.5 percent of the island is
composed of red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) thickets scattered along
the north coast, and the remainder of the island is a mixed species
tropical forest (Kaviar et al. 2012, pp. 1-3; Voirin 2015, p. 705;
Zoological Society of London (ZSL) 2017, p. 11). It is uncertain
whether sloths on Escudo are reliant on the mangroves or whether some
live entirely within the interior forest (Voirin 2015, p. 705). All
three-toed sloths are arboreal folivores; they consume leaves with
relatively low nutritional quality, necessitating physiological and
behavioral adaptations including limited movements and low muscle mass
(Anderson and Handley 2001, p. 2). Pygmy sloths have been observed
using at least 15 plant species (including mangroves) for food and
refuge, but it is not known which, if any, plant species they require
(Smith et al. 2021, unpaginated; Smith 2022, pers. comm.; Superina
2022, pers. comm.).
Few data exist specific to pygmy sloth reproduction and population
biology. Based on demographic data for three-toed sloths, it is
reasonable to conclude that an average generation time (or time between
birth of an individual and birth of its offspring) is approximately 6
to 10 years for pygmy sloths (Anderson and Handley 2002, p. 1051; Taube
et al. 2001, p. 184; Superina 2022, pers. comm.). Other three-toed
sloth species have only one offspring per pregnancy after gestation of
100-180 days (Benirschke 2008, p. 168; Taube 2001, p. 184). Longevity
and survivorship are little-known for three-toed sloths. Both genetic
data, although limited, and documentation of sloth movement into the
interior forest suggest that there is only a single population of the
species (ZSL 2017, p. 9; Voirin 2015, p. 705; Silva 2013, p. 138).
A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, and ecology of the
pygmy sloth is presented in the SSA report (version 1.1; Service 2023,
pp. 1-8).
Regulatory and Analytical Framework
Regulatory Framework
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth
the procedures for determining whether a species is an endangered
species or a threatened species, issuing protective regulations for
threatened species, and designating critical habitat for endangered and
threatened species. In 2019, jointly with the National Marine Fisheries
Service, the Service issued a final rule that revised the regulations
in 50 CFR part 424 regarding how we add, remove, and reclassify
endangered and threatened species and the criteria for designating
listed species' critical habitat (84 FR 45020; August 27, 2019). On the
same day, we issued a final rule that revised 50 CFR 17.31 and 17.71
(84 FR 44753; hereinafter, ``the 2019 4(d) rule'') and ended the
``blanket rule'' option for application of section 9 prohibitions to
species newly listed as threatened after the effective date of those
regulatory revisions (September 26, 2019). Blanket rules had extended
the majority of the protections (all of the prohibitions that apply to
endangered species under
[[Page 20931]]
section 9 and additional exceptions to the prohibitions) to threatened
species, unless we issued an alternative rule under section 4(d) of the
Act for a particular species (i.e., a species-specific 4(d) rule). The
blanket rule protections continued to apply to threatened species that
were listed prior to September 26, 2019, without an associated species-
specific rule. Under the 2019 4(d) rule, the only way to apply
protections to a species newly listed as threatened is for us to issue
a species-specific rule setting out the protective regulations that are
appropriate for that species.
Our analysis for this decision applied the regulations that are
currently in effect, which include the 2019 revisions. However, we
proposed further revisions to these regulations on June 22, 2023 (88 FR
40742; 88 FR 40764). In case those revisions are finalized before we
make a final status determination for this species, we have also
undertaken an analysis of whether the decision would be different if we
were to apply those proposed revisions. We concluded that the decision
would have been the same if we had applied the proposed 2023
regulations. The analyses under both the regulations currently in
effect and the regulations after incorporating the June 22, 2023,
proposed revisions are included in our decision file.
The Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) defines an ``endangered species''
as a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, and a ``threatened species'' as a
species that is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range. The Act requires that we determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species because of any of the
following factors:
(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(C) Disease or predation;
(D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative
effects or may have positive effects.
We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or
conditions that are known to or are reasonably likely to negatively
affect individuals of a species. The term ``threat'' includes actions
or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat''
may encompass--either together or separately--the source of the action
or condition or the action or condition itself.
However, the mere identification of any threat(s) does not
necessarily mean that the species meets the statutory definition of an
``endangered species'' or a ``threatened species.'' In determining
whether a species meets either definition, we must evaluate all
identified threats by considering the species' expected response and
the effects of the threats--in light of those actions and conditions
that will ameliorate the threats--on an individual, population, and
species level. We evaluate each threat and its expected effects on the
species, then analyze the cumulative effect of all of the threats on
the species as a whole. We also consider the cumulative effect of the
threats in light of those actions and conditions that will have
positive effects on the species, such as any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts. The Secretary determines whether
the species meets the definition of an ``endangered species'' or a
``threatened species'' only after conducting this cumulative analysis
and describing the expected effect on the species now and in the
foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future,'' which
appears in the statutory definition of ``threatened species.'' Our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a framework for
evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis. The term
``foreseeable future'' extends only so far into the future as we can
reasonably determine that both the future threats and the species'
responses to those threats are likely. In other words, the foreseeable
future is the period of time in which we can make reliable predictions.
``Reliable'' does not mean ``certain''; it means sufficient to provide
a reasonable degree of confidence in the prediction. Thus, a prediction
is reliable if it is reasonable to depend on it when making decisions.
It is not always possible or necessary to define the foreseeable
future as a particular number of years. Analysis of the foreseeable
future uses the best scientific and commercial data available and
should consider the timeframes applicable to the relevant threats and
to the species' likely responses to those threats in view of its life-
history characteristics. Data that are typically relevant to assessing
the species' biological response include species-specific factors such
as lifespan, reproductive rates or productivity, certain behaviors, and
other demographic factors.
We considered the threats of habitat loss and degradation and
tourism and development, along with demographic factors of pygmy
sloths, and determined the foreseeable future to be approximately 30
years. This timeline for the foreseeable future is based on several
factors. The pygmy sloth generation time is estimated to be between 6
and 10 years, and similar species only have one offspring per
pregnancy. Thus, the demographic responses of the species to the
identified threats will materialize rapidly across just a few (<5)
generations. This determination of foreseeable future being 30 years
assumes enough time will pass for three to five generations of cohorts
to represent the population's resiliency to the identified threats.
Thirty years will also include time for climate change and development
to progress, as well as for conservation activities affecting Escudo to
develop. We are very confident in the predictions from our climate
models out to this time step. Although there is uncertainty in specific
rates and strengths of the impacts from development and tourism over
this time step, we are confident in the negative effects these threats
will have on pygmy sloth. We have information showing that nearby
coastal development plans are in place, roads providing access to the
coastlines are being built, and conservation capacity within the area
is limited. This information combined with demographics of this species
gives us confidence that within a 30-year future, these threats will
negatively impact the pygmy sloth. Therefore, based on the best
scientific and commercial data available, we conclude that over a
period of 30 years we can make reliable predictions that both the
future threats to the species and the species' response to those
threats are likely.
Analytical Framework
The SSA report documents the results of our comprehensive
biological review of the best scientific and commercial data regarding
the status of the species, including an assessment of the potential
threats to the species. The SSA report does not represent our decision
on whether the species should be proposed
[[Page 20932]]
for listing as an endangered or threatened species under the Act.
However, it does provide the scientific basis that informs our
regulatory decisions, which involve the further application of
standards within the Act and its implementing regulations and policies.
To assess pygmy sloth viability, we used the three conservation
biology principles of resiliency, redundancy, and representation
(Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 306-310). Briefly, resiliency is the
ability of the species to withstand environmental and demographic
stochasticity (for example, wet or dry, warm or cold years); redundancy
is the ability of the species to withstand catastrophic events (for
example, droughts, large pollution events); and representation is the
ability of the species to adapt to both near-term and long-term changes
in its physical and biological environment (for example, climate
conditions, pathogens). In general, species viability will increase
with increases in (or decrease with decreases in) resiliency,
redundancy, and representation (Smith et al. 2018, p. 306). Using these
principles, we identified the species' ecological requirements for
survival and reproduction at the individual, population, and species
levels, and described the beneficial and risk factors influencing the
species' viability.
The SSA process can be categorized into three sequential stages.
During the first stage, we evaluated the individual species' life-
history needs. The next stage involved an assessment of the historical
and current condition of the species' demographics and habitat
characteristics, including an explanation of how the species arrived at
its current condition. The final stage of the SSA involved making
predictions about the species' responses to positive and negative
environmental and anthropogenic influences. Throughout all of these
stages, we used the best available information to characterize
viability as the ability of a species to sustain populations in the
wild over time, which we then used to inform our regulatory decision.
The following is a summary of the key results and conclusions from
the SSA report; the full SSA report can be found at Docket FWS-HQ-ES-
2023-0151 on https://www.regulations.gov.
Summary of Biological Status and Threats
In this discussion, we review the biological condition of the
species and its resources, and the threats that influence the species'
current and future condition, in order to assess the species' overall
viability and the risks to that viability.
Based on the species' biology described above and in the SSA report
(version 1.1; Service 2023, pp. 1-8), the pygmy sloth requires food
plants, intact and connected forest habitats, and sufficient
conspecific individuals to find a mate. Threats to the sloth's
viability include the small extent (4.3 km\2\) of Escudo (as noted
above, pygmy sloths in the wild are found only on this one small island
in Panama), the naturally limited size of the species' single
population, direct and indirect impacts of tourism, habitat loss from
small-scale timber harvest, and habitat loss from sea-level rise and
erosion. Together, these threats make the pygmy sloth vulnerable to
random declines due to demographic stochasticity, environmental
catastrophes (e.g., storms), or both.
Threats
Small-scale but continuing harvest of red mangroves and interior
forest trees occurs on Escudo for construction of temporary huts used
by fishermen and for timber for tourism development in nearby regions
(Feller 2022, pers. comm.; ZSL 2017, p. 16). Continued forest loss
would eventually lead to a reduced pygmy sloth population, but the lack
of good information on pygmy sloth movements and densities, and their
relative reliance on mangrove versus interior forest, currently
prohibits determination of that threshold. Evidence from urban
populations of related species indicates three-toed sloth species may
be relatively resilient to life in small forest fragments (Service
2023, p. 6; Pool et al. 2016, pp. 26-30), but it is not clear whether
this extends to the pygmy sloth.
As the nearby coastal regions of the Bocas del Toro, Veraguas, and
Ngobe-Bugle provinces grow in popularity with local and especially
foreign tourists, so too has the volume of visits to Escudo and the
demand for infrastructure there (ZSL 2017, pp. 3, 17). Both Panamanians
and foreign investors are interested in developing the island and
nearby region for greater tourism commercialization (Smith 2021, pers.
comm.; Voirin 2021, pers. comm; Voirin 2015, pp. 706-707). Although
Panama has a mandatory environmental-impact-assessment process
(Gonzalez 2008, pp. 320-327), reviews are sometimes diminished by
demand for development (e.g., Gonzalez 2008, pp. 328-333) and often
initiated too late in a project's progression to revise plans or
prevent identified environmental harms (Jordan 2021, pers. comm.).
Consultations between government environmental authorities and
developers can be rapid and leave little room for adjustment of project
plans (Jordan 2021, pers. comm.).
Coastal development and construction of major roads and ports on
the nearby mainland has improved and will continue to improve
accessibility, making the trip to Escudo easier for many more people
(Smith 2021, pers. comm.; Voirin 2021, pers. comm.; Oberle and
Rodriguez 2020, entire; Bilbao 2017, unpaginated). While little is
known of the impacts of increased human presence on the island to pygmy
sloth behavior and ecology, increased tourism, particularly when
combined with inadequate regulatory mechanisms and enforcement, is
likely to lead to direct and indirect impacts on sloth viability
through up-close encounters, deforestation, habitat degradation,
increased litter and refuse, as well as the potential to increase the
introduction of pests, invasive species, and disease.
Desire for up-close or in-hand photos of pygmy sloths will likely
increase along with tourist visitation as global popularity of sloths
and demand for pet and zoo-housed sloths has grown tremendously (Voirin
2015, p. 706). The risk of sloths being illegally taken and smuggled
away from Escudo into domestic and international trade for personal and
commercial purposes is greater as more unregulated visitors reach the
island (Jordan 2021, pers. comm.; Voirin 2021, pers. comm.). This is
despite three-toed sloths rarely surviving more than several months in
captivity and a general lack of knowledge regarding husbandry
techniques for three-toed sloths (Voirin et al. 2014a, p. 2; Espinoza
and Cliffe 2013, p. 4; Raines 2005, p. 557).
While there is currently little legal international trade of the
species, there are several examples of known trade or attempts to trade
specimens of pygmy sloth. In 2013, 11 individuals were taken from the
wild with the intent to export to the United States for zoological
purposes, but the attempted export was stopped by protesters at the
Bocas del Toro Airport (Espinoza and Cliffe 2013, p. 4). These
individual pygmy sloths were soon after returned to Escudo, but at
least two died after reintroduction to the island (Superina 2022, pers.
comm.). Additionally, eight wild-sourced specimens of pygmy sloth
originating from Panama were legally exported from the United States to
Portugal for scientific purposes in 2015. In 2021, there was at least
one trade transaction of a specimen from China to the Netherlands, but
the involved specimen was recorded as a CITES pre-
[[Page 20933]]
Convention specimen, meaning the specimen was acquired (removed from
the wild or born in a controlled environment) before the date the
species was first included in the CITES Appendices (July 1, 1975), and
therefore we presume it to be a non-living specimen.
In general, Escudo and its surroundings have very limited
government presence or regulatory enforcement because of the remote
location and Escudo's semi-autonomous nature as an Indigenous-inhabited
territory that is administered by the Bocas del Toro province. While
smaller scale, Indigenous-led pygmy sloth tourism has been less
disruptive than the more industrial form (Voirin 2021, pers. comm.),
the permit requirements for tourists to visit the island are not
enforced (ZSL 2017, pp. 17-18). Small-scale tourist operations are also
likely to be outcompeted by larger organizations entering the market.
Although large-scale tourism has not yet reached Escudo as it has in
the surrounding archipelago, tourism is steadily increasing and tourist
boats arrive without notice and are reportedly damaging coral reefs and
sea turtle nesting grounds (Smith 2021, pers. comm.), indicative of at
least some operators' lack of concern for or knowledge about harm to
the island's ecology.
Finally, as sea levels rise due to global climate change, the
extent of the pygmy sloth's island habitats may be reduced
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2019, pp. 6-13). Any
loss of habitat area on the already small island could reduce the
number of sloths supported on Escudo. Anecdotally, erosion has been
increasing on Escudo (Smith 2021, pers. comm.), although its extent is
not quantified, and it is not known whether this is due to sea-level
rise, storms, coastal deforestation, or other human-caused shoreline
disturbance.
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms
The Pygmy Sloth Conservation Project, established in 2011 by ZSL's
EDGE of Existence Program, is employing innovative and integrative
activities to support pygmy sloth and Escudo conservation (ZSL 2017,
entire). The project includes repeated population surveys, education of
Indigenous communities and schoolchildren regarding Escudo ecology and
the benefits of conservation, and cooperation with the Indigenous
government and local fishermen's association to develop a community-
based natural-resources-management program (ZSL 2017, pp. 19-27).
In June 2022, a workshop was held in collaboration with the
Ministry of Environment and the Ng[auml]be-Bugl[eacute] indigenous
authorities to develop a management plan for the conservation of the
pygmy sloth (Smith 2022, pers. comm.). The information generated by
this pygmy sloth conservation action plan is expected to also serve as
the basis for a future comprehensive management plan for Escudo, but as
of the publication of this proposed rule, that plan has not yet been
developed (Smith 2022, pers. comm.).
As of 2017, the national Ministry of the Environment could not
afford to visit Escudo independently (ZSL 2017, p. 18). Consequently,
there is no evidence available to the Service of enforcement of tourism
permit requirements or anti-littering and deforestation laws. Escudo is
designated as a protected area with management shared between the
national Ministry of the Environment and the local Indigenous council
(Voirin et al. 2014a, p. 5), but in 2012, the island was classified as
open to tourism, as well as scientific, entertainment, and cultural
development, so the benefits of the protected-area designation are
limited (Voirin 2015, pp. 706-707).
Pygmy sloths are included in CITES Appendix II, and international
trade in any specimen of the species requires inter alia a valid CITES
document that authorizes trade in the specimen to accompany the
specimen. CITES export permits may only be issued by the exporting
country's CITES Management Authority after a legal acquisition finding
is made by the exporting country's CITES Management Authority and a
non-detriment finding is made by the exporting country's CITES
Scientific Authority (for additional information about CITES
requirements, see 50 CFR part 23). On May 5, 2023, CITES Notification
No. 2023/057 notified all Parties to CITES that Panama has suspended
the issuance of all exports for specimens harvested from the wild for
commercial purposes, including the pygmy sloth, until scientific non-
detriment findings are completed (CITES 2023, unpaginated).
Current Condition
We assess the pygmy sloth's resiliency using two criteria: a
population-abundance criterion and a forest-extent criterion. We
incorporate the knowledge that the species has likely always been rare
by basing the population abundance criterion on detection of a
population decline in addition to considering absolute abundance, as
rarer species are at elevated risk of extinction even if the rarity is
natural (Flather and Sieg 2007, entire; Johnson 1998, entire). The
forest-extent criterion subsumes the pygmy sloth's requirements for
shelter, connectivity, and native food plants.
Considering these two resiliency criteria to account for the
species' demographic and habitat requirements, we determined thresholds
for high, medium, and low resiliency for the pygmy sloth. High
resiliency would indicate a high probability of population viability
with minimal to no declines in population size. Moderate resiliency
would indicate the species has experienced possible population
declines. Low resiliency would indicate low probability of population
viability with certain population decline.
While it is difficult to estimate the true size of the population
due to the challenge of detecting (and therefore counting) pygmy sloths
(Voirin 2015, p. 705), the most recent estimate of the total pygmy
sloth population size is 2,000-2,500 individuals, and the population is
estimated to be declining (Smith et al. 2022, unpaginated). The most
recently available population trend data from mangrove surveys in 2014-
2017 show no change in encounter rate of sloths, although the
uncertainty in abundance is large (ZSL 2017, p. 13). All estimates
indicate an extremely small number for an entire species (Smith et al.
2022, unpaginated).
Based on our assessment of deforestation from 2000-2020, only 0.11
percent of forested area in 2000 (totaling 3.95 km\2\) was deforested
by 2020 (data from Hansen et al. 2013, unpaginated; Service 2023, pp.
14-16). This assessment, however, is based on satellite data
(approximately 30 meters (m) resolution) and does not detect partial
clearings. While ground-based mapping of deforestation events shows
partial tree clearing has occurred on Escudo (ZSL 2017, p. 16) and a
recently published assessment indicates habitat degradation has
resulted in a continuing decline in the quality of pygmy sloth habitat
(Smith et al. 2022, unpaginated), our assessment indicates the forest
extent on Escudo remains mostly intact.
We assess that the pygmy sloth presently has moderate-to-high
resiliency, because the best available data indicate that pygmy sloth
abundance and the extent of habitat available on Escudo have not
considerably declined, but there remains substantial uncertainty in
these estimates.
With no captive individuals and only one wild population located on
an island less than 5 km\2\ in extent, the
[[Page 20934]]
pygmy sloth naturally has very low redundancy. Although very few large
cyclones and storms reach Escudo, it is seismically active, and loss of
the Escudo population would equate to global extinction.
With respect to representation, the isolation of a small number of
founder individuals when the pygmy sloth separated from the mainland
population of brown-throated sloths (likely around 9,000 years ago;
Anderson and Handley 2001, p. 4) would have created a natural genetic
bottleneck (a sharp decrease in a population's genetic diversity as a
result of a reduction in population size; Silva 2013, p. 138). Today,
genetic variation in the population is low (Silva et al. 2018, p.
1301), and because the pygmy sloth only inhabits Escudo, the habitats
it uses have little ecological variation. For these reasons, we
consider the pygmy sloth's ability to adapt to changing environments,
and thus its representation, to be naturally low.
Future Scenarios
Based on our assessment, we concluded that two important potential
threats to pygmy sloth viability in the future are: (1) increased
development and tourism around--and visitation to--the island, together
with the increased likelihood of illegal taking and trade in the
species, and (2) increased habitat loss and degradation caused by
deforestation and inundation of Escudo.
In the SSA report, we forecast the species' status under two
alternative future scenarios and six climate-change projections
(encompassing the uncertainty in sea-level-rise trajectories) to
determine how deforestation, the demand for sloths in the pet and
tourism market, and the potential for the already small extent of
Escudo to be further reduced by rising sea level would affect the
species. Specifically, our scenarios include ``status quo'' and
``improved conservation capacity'' alternatives to assess the potential
impacts of growing development and tourism. For each of these two
scenarios, we assessed six climate-change projections to help encompass
the uncertainty in sea-level-rise trajectories for the year 2050. This
is approximately 30 years from this proposed listing and would include
time for climate change and development to progress, as well as for
conservation activities affecting Escudo to grow. Based on studies from
other three-toed sloth species, this 30-year timeframe will include
around three to five generations of pygmy sloths (Anderson and Handley
2002, p. 1051).
Tourism and Development
A comprehensive understanding of the current and future conditions
of tourism on Escudo is currently lacking due to uncertainty in plans
for imminent coastal development and the inherent difficulty of
monitoring and enforcing regulations because of the remote nature of
the island and lack of funding for enforcement. Observational accounts
indicate that although large tourism operations are not currently
reaching Escudo, the amount of tourism arriving to the island is
increasing, and, if the planned development of the nearby remote
coastline occurs, tourism, including from large outfitters, will likely
increase in volume (Jordan 2021, pers. comm.; Smith 2021, pers. comm.;
Voirin 2021, pers. comm.).
International tourist visitation to Panama grew by 150 percent
between 2000 and 2008, and nature-based tourism is an increasing
portion of Panama's economy (Beaton and Hadzi-Vazkov 2017, pp. 23-29).
Tourism grew fast in the coastal and island regions of Bocas Del Toro
province (to which Escudo belongs) from the 1990s onwards, including
growing accessibility to vast stretches of beach and rainforest. For
instance, beginning in 2004 and continuing into at least 2017, a major
road was under construction from Santa Fe to the coastal city of
Calovebora in northern Veraguas province (Bilbao 2017, unpaginated).
The road's route is a major new access point to undeveloped areas
within easy boating distance of Escudo (Bilbao 2017, unpaginated).
Additionally, developers have for several years been amassing land
holdings in the regions near Escudo, and they may be planning for the
resale of lots for future homes and hotels (Jordan 2021, pers. comm).
As additional people move to and visit the region, the very strong
demand for sloths taken from the wild for tourists' ``sloth selfies''
or for sale into the pet trade (Greenfield 2020, unpaginated) will
likely impact pygmy sloths (Voirin 2021, pers. comm.; Jordan 2021,
pers. comm.). For example, other sloth species are illegally collected
from the wild in Colombia for hands-on tourism or illegal pet trade
(Gorder 2021, unpaginated; Moreno and Plese 2006, p. 12).
The General Law on Environment of the Republic of Panama (Article
23 of Law No. 41 (1998)) requires that public or private projects,
including tourism developments, be vetted through an environmental-
impact-assessment (EIA) process administered by the national Ministry
of the Environment (Gonzalez 2008, p. 324; Bethancourt 2000,
unpaginated). In practice, however, developers often do not file for an
EIA or do so very late in the project's progress, which makes
substantive changes to the project challenging (Jordan 2021, pers.
comm.). Consultations that do take place, particularly in remote
locations, are frequently cursory (Jordan 2021, pers. comm.).
By 2050 under the status quo alternative, if the lack of
environmental law enforcement capacity in the remote Escudo region (ZSL
2017, p. 18) continues, the limitations of Panama's EIA process are not
rectified, and the unplanned nature of regional development (Jordan
2021, pers. comm.) persists, modest to large declines in the species'
population are likely. These declines are likely due to the stresses of
increased visitation to Escudo (including up-close encounters), habitat
degradation, and illegal poaching to meet the demand for the pet and
zoo trade domestically and internationally.
If, on the other hand, the ongoing conservation efforts (see
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms, above) lead to improved
conservation capacity around Escudo, pygmy sloth population declines
would be less likely to occur. A future with improved conservation
capacity would include the regular presence of well-equipped
conservation officers from the national Ministry of the Environment or
Indigenous governments or both, and only sustainable, well-regulated
tourist visits to Escudo with no pygmy sloths captured or disturbed. A
completed management plan would include enforcement of specific
limitations on the volume and activities of tourists and others to
avoid pygmy sloth collection and deforestation. While ongoing work to
support pygmy sloth conservation (see Conservation Efforts and
Regulatory Mechanisms, above) indicates this is a possible future
scenario, given the historical and ongoing challenges of regulation and
enforcement on Escudo, this outcome is less likely than the status quo
scenario.
Loss of Habitat
Given its small island habitat, the pygmy sloth's viability is
sensitive to the potential for further reduction in the available areas
on Escudo, for example losses due to sea-level rise and deforestation.
To assess the impacts of sea-level rise, we used climate models
forecasting where land presently above water will be lost due to sea-
level rise. We used these data to project the extent of pygmy sloth
habitat expected to be lost under different climate-change
[[Page 20935]]
scenarios. Specifically, we included six alternative climate
trajectories defined by the (1) degree of greenhouse-gas emissions
reduction achieved (three representative concentration pathways (RCPs),
RCPs 2.6, 4.5, and 8.5) by 2050, and (2) two different rates of
Antarctic ice-sheet melting, an uncertain but potentially major
contributor to global sea-level rise (Kulp and Strauss 2018, p. 2; Kopp
et al. 2017, entire; Kopp et al. 2014, entire).
The RCPs are Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
scenarios that describe alternative future trajectories of greenhouse
gas emissions and that are used to drive climate-model projections in
response to higher or lower future emission rates (IPCC 2014, p. 8). In
the RCP names, the values 2.6, 4.5, and 8.5 refer to the rate at which
energy is trapped by Earth's atmosphere in watts per square meter
(m\2\) at the height of warming for the given scenario; thus, RCP 8.5
is a scenario indicating faster warming than RCP 4.5. RCP 8.5 is
considered a ``high-emission business as usual scenario,'' i.e.,
towards the upper end of what might occur without climate-change
mitigation policy (Riahi et al. 2011, p. 54). RCP 4.5 is based on a
lower-emissions future in which renewable energy, greater energy
efficiency, and carbon capture and storage are more widely implemented
(Thomson et al. 2011, p. 77). RCP 2.6 represents stringent cuts to
greenhouse gas emissions sufficient to limit warming to 2 degrees
Celsius ([deg]C) (van Vuuren et al. 2011, entire).
The extent of Escudo habitat inundated by 2050 ranged from 0.04
percent (RCP 2.6, no rapid West Antarctic melting) to 0.08 percent (RCP
8.5, rapid West Antarctic melting; Service 2023, p. 20). Even if we
assumed for the most pessimistic scenario (0.08 percent of the entire
island inundated) that the entirety of the inundated habitat was
concentrated within the 2.5 percent of the island that is mangrove
forests, only slightly more than 3 percent of the mangroves would be
inundated. However, although inundation is focused on coastal edges of
the island and includes some locations on the north coast where
mangroves grow, part of the inundation will occur outside the
mangroves, so the 3 percent figure is likely an overestimate. Moreover,
red mangroves can possibly keep pace with sea-level rise by growing
taller and accumulating peat beneath their stilt roots (Mckee et al.
2007, entire; Feller 2021, pers. comm.). The interior forest habitat is
more extensive than mangroves (ZSL 2017, p. 11) and, when compared to
estimates for mangrove forests, less interior forest habitat is
projected to be lost as a result of sea-level rise. Thus, we project
that loss of habitat due to sea-level rise will be at most 3 percent
across mangrove and interior forest habitats.
Deforestation presents a second potential cause of habitat loss and
degradation. Forecasting future rates of deforestation is difficult due
to the discrepancies between ground observations and satellite data of
deforestation, as well as the unknown impact that, if implemented,
development plans and potential subsequent tourism increases might have
on deforestation. Under a status quo future, deforestation may continue
as it occurs now, at low and consistent levels, or it may increase,
given the interest expressed by some Indigenous people in living on
Escudo and the expansion of tourism and associated infrastructure
development on the island. With improved conservation capacity,
including increased monitoring and enforcement of land use of the
island, we project that deforestation levels would be low.
Overall Future Resiliency, Redundancy, and Representation
Regardless of the climate-change scenario, if the conservation
capacity around Escudo does not improve (i.e., if it remains at the
status quo), the total resilience of the pygmy sloth is projected to
decline, likely falling into the moderate-to-low-resiliency category,
and potentially falling into the low-resiliency category. If
conservation capacity is improved around Escudo, we project that the
pygmy sloth's resiliency could improve despite the species' natural
rarity. However, high uncertainty exists in both current and future
resiliency due to the limited data available on population abundance,
rates of deforestation, and effects of tourism and development on the
species. Additionally, given the historical and current lack of
regulatory and enforcement capacity, outcomes under the improved-
conservation-capacity scenario, although possible, are less likely than
those under the status quo scenario.
Redundancy is not projected to change under any of the future
scenarios; we expect there to remain only the single Escudo population.
Representation may remain the same or may decrease if tourists arriving
at the relatively accessible island edge and beaches stress pygmy
sloths into retreating into the interior forest and reduce the habitat
types pygmy sloths use, further limiting the species' adaptive
potential.
We note that, by using the SSA framework to guide our analysis of
the scientific information documented in the SSA report, we have
analyzed the cumulative effects of identified threats and conservation
actions on the species. To assess the current and future condition of
the species, we evaluate the effects of all the relevant factors that
may be influencing the species, including threats and conservation
efforts. Because the SSA framework considers not just the presence of
the factors, but to what degree they collectively influence risk to the
entire species, our assessment integrates the cumulative effects of the
factors and replaces a standalone cumulative-effects analysis.
Determination of Pygmy Sloth's Status
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for determining
whether a species meets the definition of an endangered species or a
threatened species. The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a
species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion
of its range, and a ``threatened species'' as a species likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we
determine whether a species meets the definition of an endangered
species or a threatened species because of any of the following
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C)
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence.
Status Throughout All of Its Range
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, we determined that the future viability of the pygmy sloth
will be reduced as ongoing and future development on the mainland
nearest Escudo increases accessibility to the island, likely reducing
the pygmy sloth's resiliency, which along with its naturally low
redundancy and representation will likely compromise the security of
the species' continued existence within the foreseeable future.
The pygmy sloth is a narrow endemic species with a small population
and very limited range. Given the pygmy sloth's rarity and low genetic
diversity, the species has naturally low
[[Page 20936]]
representation and redundancy. While tourism and small-scale timber
harvest are ongoing in the species' range, the pygmy sloth is not
currently at risk of extinction because it maintains moderate-to-high
resiliency with a variety of age classes and evidence of reproduction,
and while it is naturally restricted to the very small island of
Escudo, its habitat requirements do not currently appear to be
limiting. Although the species currently is not at risk of extinction,
threats to the species are expected to increase in the foreseeable
future. Ongoing and anticipated development on the nearby mainland will
facilitate increased access to Escudo, increasing disturbance to pygmy
sloths through deforestation, up-close interactions, and illegal taking
and smuggling into domestic and international trade for personal and
commercial purposes. While there are regulatory mechanisms in place to
protect against these threats, enforcement in the species' relatively
remote range is limited and is likely inadequate to reduce the impacts
of increased tourism and deforestation. The current population of the
pygmy sloth is estimated to be declining, and the likely increase of
threats in the foreseeable future will reduce the species' viability to
a point that it is likely to lack sufficient resiliency,
representation, and redundancy for its continued existence to be
secure.
Thus, after assessing the best available information, we conclude
that the pygmy sloth is not currently in danger of extinction but is
likely to become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future
throughout all of its range due to increased threats from tourism and
development that will likely lead to habitat loss and degradation
(Factor A), overutilization in a variety of forms from increasing human
interactions (Factor B), and the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms (Factor D).
Status Throughout a Significant Portion of Its Range
Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may
warrant listing if it is in danger of extinction or likely to become so
within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion
of its range. The court in Center for Biological Diversity v. Everson,
435 F. Supp. 3d 69 (D.D.C. 2020) (Everson), vacated the provision of
the Final Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase ``Significant Portion
of Its Range'' in the Endangered Species Act's Definitions of
``Endangered Species'' and ``Threatened Species'' (hereafter ``Final
Policy''; 79 FR 37578, July 1, 2014) that provided if the Service
determines that a species is threatened throughout all of its range,
the Service will not analyze whether the species is endangered in a
significant portion of its range.
Therefore, we proceed to evaluating whether the species is
endangered in a significant portion of its range--that is, whether
there is any portion of the species' range for which both (1) the
portion is significant; and (2) the species is in danger of extinction
in that portion. Depending on the case, it might be more efficient for
us to address the ``significance'' question or the ``status'' question
first. We can choose to address either question first. Regardless of
which question we address first, if we reach a negative answer with
respect to the first question that we address, we do not need to
evaluate the other question for that portion of the species' range.
Following the court's holding in Everson, we now consider whether
there are any significant portions of the species' range where the
species is in danger of extinction now (i.e., endangered). In
undertaking this analysis for pygmy sloth, we choose to address the
status question first--we consider information pertaining to the
geographic distribution of both the species and the threats that the
species faces to identify portions of the range where the species may
be endangered.
We evaluated the range of the pygmy sloth to determine if the
species is in danger of extinction now in any portion of its range. The
pygmy sloth is a narrow endemic that functions as a single, contiguous
population and occurs entirely within a 4.3 km\2\ island. Thus, there
is no biologically meaningful way to break this limited range into
portions, and the threats that the species faces affect the species
throughout its entire range. As a result, there are no portions of the
species' range where the species has a different biological status from
its rangewide biological status. Therefore, we conclude that there are
no portions of the species' range that warrant further consideration,
and the species is not in danger of extinction in any significant
portion of its range, and we determine that the species is likely to
become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout
all of its range. This does not conflict with the courts' holdings in
Desert Survivors v. U.S. Department of the Interior, 321 F. Supp. 3d
1011, 1070-74 (N.D. Cal. 2018), and Center for Biological Diversity v.
Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d 946, 959 (D. Ariz. 2017), because, in reaching
this conclusion, we did not apply the aspects of the Final Policy,
including the definition of ``significant'' that those court decisions
held to be invalid.
Determination of Status
Our review of the best available scientific and commercial
information indicates that the pygmy sloth meets the Act's definition
of a threatened species. Therefore, we propose to list the pygmy sloth
as a threatened species in accordance with sections 3(20) and 4(a)(1)
of the Act.
Available Conservation Measures
The purposes of the Act are to provide a means whereby the
ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend
may be conserved, to provide a program for the conservation of such
endangered species and threatened species, and to take such steps as
may be appropriate to achieve the purposes of the treaties and
conventions set forth in the Act. Under the Act, a number of steps are
available to advance the conservation of species listed as endangered
or threatened species. As explained further below, these conservation
measures include: (1) recognition, (2) recovery actions, (3)
requirements for Federal protection, (4) financial assistance for
conservation programs, and (5) prohibitions against certain activities.
Recognition through listing results in public awareness, as well as
in conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, foreign
governments, private organizations, and individuals. The Act encourages
cooperation with the States and other countries and calls for recovery
actions to be carried out for listed species.
Section 7 of the Act is titled, ``Interagency Cooperation,'' and it
mandates all Federal action agencies to use their existing authorities
to further the conservation purposes of the Act and to ensure that
their actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of
listed species or adversely modify critical habitat. Regulations
implementing section 7 are codified at 50 CFR part 402.
Section 7(a)(2) states that each Federal action agency shall, in
consultation with the Secretary, ensure that any action they authorize,
fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat.
A Federal ``action'' that is subject to the consultation provisions
of section 7(a)(2) of the Act is defined in our implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 402.02 as all activities or programs of any kind
authorized, funded, or carried out, in whole or in part, by Federal
[[Page 20937]]
agencies in the United States or upon the high seas. With respect to
pygmy sloth, no known actions require consultation under section
7(a)(2) of the Act. Given the regulatory definition of ``action,''
which clarifies that it applies to activities or programs ``in the
United States or upon the high seas,'' the pygmy sloth is unlikely to
be the subject of section 7 consultations, because the entire life
cycle of the species occurs in terrestrial areas outside of the United
States and the species is unlikely to be affected by U.S. Federal
actions. Additionally, no critical habitat will be designated for the
species because, under 50 CFR 424.12(g), we will not designate critical
habitat within foreign countries or in other areas outside of the
jurisdiction of the United States.
Section 8(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1537(a)) authorizes the
provision of limited financial assistance for the development and
management of programs that the Secretary of the Interior determines to
be necessary or useful for the conservation of endangered or threatened
species in foreign countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1537(b) and (c)) authorize the Secretary to encourage
conservation programs for foreign listed species, and to provide
assistance for such programs, in the form of personnel and the training
of personnel.
It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1,
1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the extent known at the time a
species is listed, specific activities that will not be considered
likely to result in violation of section 9 of the Act. To the extent
possible, activities that will be considered likely to result in
violation will also be identified in as specific a manner as possible.
The intent of this policy is to increase public awareness of the effect
of a proposed listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the
range of the species proposed for listing. Although most of the
prohibitions in section 9 of the Act apply to endangered species,
sections 9(a)(1)(G) and 9(a)(2)(E) of the Act also prohibit the
violation of any regulation issued under section 4(d) of the Act
pertaining to any threatened species of fish or wildlife, or threatened
species of plant, respectively. Section 9(g) additionally makes it
illegal to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit, or to cause
to be committed any act prohibited under Section 9, including
violations of a 4(d) rule. Section 4(d) of the Act grants the Secretary
broad discretion to prohibit with respect to any threatened species any
act prohibited under Section 9(a)(1), in the case of fish or wildlife,
or section 9(a)(2), in the case of plants. Section 4(d) also directs
the Secretary to promulgate protective regulations that are necessary
and advisable for the conservation of threatened species. As a result,
we interpret our policy to mean that, when we list a species as a
threatened species, to the extent possible, we identify activities that
will or will not be considered likely to result in violation of the
protective regulations under section 4(d) for that species.
At this time, we are unable to identify specific activities that
would or would not be considered likely to result in violation of
section 9 of the Act beyond those included in the descriptions of
proposed prohibitions and exceptions we would establish by protective
regulation under section 4(d) of the Act (see II. Proposed Rule Issued
Under Section 4(d) of the Act, below).
We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered and threatened wildlife species under certain
circumstances. Regulations governing permits for threatened species are
codified at 50 CFR 17.32, and general Service permitting regulations
are codified at 50 CFR part 13. With regard to threatened wildlife, a
permit may be issued for scientific purposes, to enhance the
propagation or survival of the species, for incidental take in
connection with otherwise lawful activities, for economic hardship, for
zoological exhibition, for educational purposes, and for special
purposes consistent with the purposes of the Act. The statute also
contains certain exemptions from the prohibitions, which are found in
sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
The Service may also register persons subject to the jurisdiction
of the United States through its captive-bred wildlife (CBW) program if
certain established requirements are met under the CBW regulations (see
50 CFR 17.21(g)). Through a CBW registration, the Service may allow a
registrant to conduct certain otherwise prohibited activities under
certain circumstances to enhance the propagation or survival of the
affected species, including take; export or re-import; delivery,
receipt, carriage, transport, or shipment in interstate or foreign
commerce in the course of a commercial activity; or sale or offer for
sale in interstate or foreign commerce. A CBW registration may
authorize interstate purchase and sale only between entities that both
hold a registration for the taxon concerned. The CBW program is
available for species having a natural geographic distribution not
including any part of the United States and other species that the
Service Director has determined to be eligible by regulation. The
individual specimens must have been born in captivity in the United
States.
Separate from its proposed listing as a threatened species, as a
CITES-listed species, all international trade of pygmy sloths by
persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States must also
comply with CITES requirements pursuant to section 9, paragraphs (c)
and (g), of the Act and to 50 CFR part 23. Applicable wildlife import/
export requirements established under section 9, paragraphs (d), (e),
and (f), of the Act; the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3371
et seq.); and 50 CFR part 14 must also be met for pygmy sloth imports
and exports. Questions regarding whether specific activities with pygmy
sloths would constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act should be
directed to the Service's Division of Management Authority
([email protected]; 703-358-2104).
II. Proposed Rule Issued Under Section 4(d) of the Act
Background
Section 4(d) of the Act contains two sentences. The first sentence
states that the Secretary shall issue such regulations as she deems
necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of species
listed as threatened species. The U.S. Supreme Court has noted that
statutory language similar to the language in section 4(d) of the Act
authorizing the Secretary to take action that she ``deems necessary and
advisable'' affords a large degree of deference to the agency (see
Webster v. Doe, 486 U.S. 592, 600 (1988)). Conservation is defined in
the Act to mean the use of all methods and procedures which are
necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the
point at which the measures provided pursuant to the Act are no longer
necessary. Additionally, the second sentence of section 4(d) of the Act
states that the Secretary may by regulation prohibit with respect to
any threatened species any act prohibited under section 9(a)(1), in the
case of fish or wildlife, or section 9(a)(2), in the case of plants.
Thus, the combination of the two sentences of section 4(d) provides the
Secretary with wide latitude of discretion to select and promulgate
appropriate regulations tailored to the specific conservation needs of
the threatened species. The second sentence grants particularly broad
discretion to the Service when adopting one or more of the prohibitions
under section 9.
The courts have recognized the extent of the Secretary's discretion
under this
[[Page 20938]]
standard to develop rules that are appropriate for the conservation of
a species. For example, courts have upheld, as a valid exercise of
agency authority, rules developed under section 4(d) that included
limited prohibitions against takings (see Alsea Valley Alliance v.
Lautenbacher, 2007 WL 2344927 (D. Or. 2007); Washington Environmental
Council v. National Marine Fisheries Service, 2002 WL 511479 (W.D.
Wash. 2002)). Courts have also upheld 4(d) rules that do not address
all of the threats a species faces (see State of Louisiana v. Verity,
853 F.2d 322 (5th Cir. 1988)). As noted in the legislative history when
the Act was initially enacted, ``once an animal is on the threatened
list, the Secretary has an almost infinite number of options available
to [her] with regard to the permitted activities for those species.
[She] may, for example, permit taking, but not importation of such
species, or [she] may choose to forbid both taking and importation but
allow the transportation of such species'' (H.R. Rep. No. 412, 93rd
Cong., 1st Sess. 1973).
The provisions of this proposed 4(d) rule would promote
conservation of the pygmy sloth by ensuring that activities undertaken
with the species by any person under the jurisdiction of the United
States are also supportive of the conservation efforts undertaken for
the species in Panama, as well as under the CITES Appendix-II listing.
The provisions of this proposed rule are one of many tools that we
would use to promote the conservation of the pygmy sloth. This proposed
4(d) rule would apply only if and when we make final the listing of the
pygmy sloth as a threatened species.
As discussed above under Summary of Biological Status and Threats,
we have concluded that the pygmy sloth is likely to become in danger of
extinction within the foreseeable future primarily due to the impacts
that nearby development and subsequent increased tourism will have on
the species and its habitat. Under the proposed 4(d) rule, prohibitions
and provisions that apply to endangered wildlife under section 9(a)(1)
of the Act would help minimize threats that could cause further
declines in the species' status.
Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Rule
Exercising the Secretary's authority under section 4(d) of the Act,
we have developed a proposed rule that is designed to address the pygmy
sloth's conservation needs. As discussed previously in Summary of
Biological Status and Threats, we have concluded that the pygmy sloth
is likely to become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable
future primarily due to the impacts that nearby development and
subsequent increased tourism will have on the species and its habitat.
Section 4(d) requires the Secretary to issue such regulations as she
deems necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of each
threatened species and authorizes the Secretary to include among those
protective regulations any of the prohibitions that section 9(a)(1) of
the Act prescribes for endangered species. We find that, if finalized,
the protections, prohibitions, and exceptions in this proposed rule as
a whole satisfy the requirement in section 4(d) of the Act to issue
regulations deemed necessary and advisable to provide for the
conservation of the pygmy sloth.
The protective regulations we are proposing for the pygmy sloth
incorporate prohibitions from section 9(a)(1) to address the threats to
the species. The prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) of the Act, and
implementing regulations codified at 50 CFR 17.21, make it illegal for
any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to commit,
to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit or to cause to be
committed any of the following acts with regard to any endangered
wildlife, unless they are otherwise authorized or permitted: (1) import
into, or export from, the United States; (2) take within the United
States, within the territorial sea of the United States, or on the high
seas; (3) possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship, by any
means whatsoever, any such wildlife that has been taken illegally; (4)
deliver, receive, carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign
commerce, by any means whatsoever and in the course of commercial
activity; or (5) sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign
commerce. Certain exceptions to these prohibitions apply to employees
or agents of the Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, other
Federal land management agencies, and State conservation agencies.
Under the Act, ``take'' means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any
such conduct. Some of these provisions have been further defined in
regulations at 50 CFR 17.3. Take can result knowingly or otherwise, by
direct and indirect impacts, intentionally or incidentally. This
protective regulation would provide for the conservation of the pygmy
sloth by including all of these prohibitions because the pygmy sloth is
at risk of extinction within the foreseeable future and putting these
prohibitions in place would help to decrease synergistic, negative
effects from other ongoing or future threats.
As discussed above under Summary of Biological Status and Threats,
deforestation, tourism and development around Escudo, and collection
for tourism, pet, and zoo demand are affecting the status of the pygmy
sloth. Prohibiting take (which applies to take within the United
States, within the territorial sea of the United States, or upon the
high seas) would indirectly contribute to conservation of the species
in its range country of Panama by helping to prevent attempts to
captive-breed the species to establish a domestic market for trade of
pygmy sloths. Collection of the species for tourism, zoo, and pet
demand poses an ongoing threat to the species due to its limited range
and small population size. Further regulating import and export to,
from, and through the United States and foreign commerce by persons
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States could deter breeding
and demand for the species and help conserve the species by eliminating
the United States as a potential market for illegally collected and
traded pygmy sloths.
Despite these prohibitions regarding threatened species, we may
under certain circumstances issue permits to carry out one or more
otherwise-prohibited activities, including those described above. The
regulations that govern permits for threatened wildlife state that the
Director may issue a permit authorizing any activity otherwise
prohibited with regard to threatened species. These include permits
issued for the following purposes: for scientific purposes, to enhance
propagation or survival, for economic hardship, for zoological
exhibition, for educational purposes, for incidental taking, or for
special purposes consistent with the purposes of the Act (50 CFR
17.32).
There are other standard exceptions to the prohibitions included in
the proposed 4(d) rule for the pygmy sloth (see Proposed Regulation
Promulgation, below), and the statute also contains certain exemptions
from the prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
If the species-specific 4(d) rule is finalized as proposed, the import
exemption for threatened wildlife listed in Appendix II of CITES (50
CFR 17.8; section 9(c)(2) of the Act) would not apply to this species.
A threatened species import permit under 50 CFR 17.32 would be required
for the importation of all specimens of pygmy sloth. Further, as noted
above, we may also authorize certain activities associated with
conservation breeding
[[Page 20939]]
under CBW registrations. We recognize that captive breeding of wildlife
can support conservation, for example by producing animals that could
be used for reintroductions. We are not aware of any captive-breeding
programs of pygmy sloths for this purpose. The proposed 4(d) rule would
apply to all live pygmy sloths and dead pygmy sloth parts and products
and supports conservation management efforts for pygmy sloths in the
wild in Panama.
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long,
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) need not be prepared
in connection with listing a species as an endangered or threatened
species under the Endangered Species Act. We published a notice
outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available
on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov and upon request from
the Branch of Delisting and Foreign Species (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of
the Fish and Wildlife Service's Species Assessment Team and the Branch
of Delisting and Foreign Species.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Plants,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. In Sec. 17.11, in paragraph (h), amend the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife by adding an entry for ``Sloth, pygmy three-toed''
in alphabetical order under MAMMALS to read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listing citations
Common name Scientific name Where listed Status and applicable
rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mammals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sloth, pygmy three-toed.......... Bradypus pygmaeus.. Wherever found..... T [Federal Register
citation when
published as a
final rule]; 50
CFR 17.40(v).\4d\
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Amend Sec. 17.40 by adding paragraph (v) to read as follows:
Sec. 17.40 Special rules--mammals.
* * * * *
(v) Pygmy three-toed sloth (Bradypus pygmaeus).
(1) Prohibitions. The following prohibitions that apply to
endangered wildlife also apply to the pygmy three-toed sloth. Except as
provided under paragraph (v)(2) of this section and Sec. Sec. 17.4 and
17.5, it is unlawful for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States to commit, to attempt to commit, to solicit another to
commit, or cause to be committed, any of the following acts in regard
to this species:
(i) Import or export, as set forth at Sec. 17.21(b) for endangered
wildlife.
(ii) Take, as set forth at Sec. 17.21(c)(1) for endangered
wildlife.
(iii) Possession and other acts with unlawfully taken specimens, as
set forth at Sec. 17.21(d)(1) for endangered wildlife.
(iv) Interstate or foreign commerce in the course of commercial
activity, as set forth at Sec. 17.21(e) for endangered wildlife.
(v) Sale or offer for sale, as set forth at Sec. 17.21(f) for
endangered wildlife.
(2) Exceptions from prohibitions. In regard to this species, you
may:
(i) Conduct activities as authorized by a permit under Sec. 17.32.
(ii) Take, as set forth at Sec. 17.21(c)(2) through (c)(4) for
endangered wildlife.
(iii) Possess and engage in other acts with unlawfully taken
wildlife, as set forth at Sec. 17.21(d)(2) for endangered wildlife.
(iv) Conduct activities as authorized by a captive-bred wildlife
registration under Sec. 17.21(g) for endangered wildlife.
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-05724 Filed 3-25-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P